twenty-two Sacred Space and Architecture in the Patronage of the First Grand Duke of Tuscany Cosimo I, San Lorenzo, and the Consolidation of the Medici Dynasty Emanuela Ferretti Cosimo I’s architectural patronage is the lack of any objective, comprehensive patronage rights over subject of a considerable number of general works, mono- San Lorenzo, as Vincenzo Borghini was to point out, and the graphic studies, and complex critical essays. Together, they almost “spontaneous” adherence of the San Lorenzo complex provide us with a clear, comprehensive image of the works to the canons of the Council of Trent, a sort of postconciliar commissioned by the first grand duke of Tuscany and the architectural palimpsest that must have played a guiding role significant contributions he made both on an urban scale during the course of later developments concerning the rela- and at individual sites.1 Within this broad corpus of writ- tionship between the Counter-Reformation and architecture ings, Cosimo I’s commission of religious architecture seems, in Florence. in more recent studies in particular, less clearly defined.2 Such works include the basilica of San Lorenzo. While the painted decorations of the choir by Pontormo and Bronzino COSIMO I’S ROLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT are among the most widely studied in sixteenth-century OF THE SAN LORENZO COMPLEX: Florentine art, the contributions of Cosimo I and his sons to The State of Knowledge the San Lorenzo complex have yet to be subjected to a broad Cosimo I’s commission of work at San Lorenzo involved var- analysis, as neither the individual features nor the incomplete ious projects, including the continuation and completion of projects have been studied in any organic manner. The pres- the building work, begun by Leo X and Clement VII, on the ent essay aims to reconstruct events in two main directions. New Sacristy 3 and the Library (1548–72);4 the decoration First, the nature of the grand dukes’ patronage rights over the of the choir (1546–58), which had already been scheduled, basilica, a consequence of the desire to establish continuity albeit in a different format, by Clement VII;5 the frescoes at from the line of Cosimo the Elder to that of Pier Francesco the entrance to the nave and aisles6 (1564–69); promotion of il Popolano, also within the San Lorenzo complex. Second, the project for the tomb of his father, Giovanni dalle Bande the exemplary nature of the Medici contributions to San Nere;7 the arrangement of Donatello’s pulpits (1559, 1565);8 Lorenzo in relation to the early acceptance and implemen- and the project for a chapel behind the choir, to be used as a tation of the recommendations laid down by the Council of mausoleum for the new dynasty (1567–68), which was only Trent (1545–63), as seen in the renovation of the churches completed later by Ferdinando I (from 1604).9 These works, of Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce. The picture that some of which were left unfinished, followed a far from lin- emerges is one of two main themes: Cosimo I de’ Medici’s ear path. With hindsight, we clearly recognize the continuity 504 of Cosimo I’s modus operandi in the basilica of San Lorenzo, established the public curatorship of the Collegiata and all its known locally as “the Medici’s Church,” compared to that of related property and rights. This was a highly significant pre- his predecessors. The project, however, was complex, involv- rogative, albeit not comparable to a real ius patronatus.14 The ing considerable effort and a series of strategies cleverly con- aforesaid provision can be found next to the transcriptions cealed in the final work and duly celebrated by the Medici of several papal bulls in the “Bollario Laurenziano,” drawn family’s own propaganda. up by Cosimo III (1642–1732) (Fig. 22.1).15 In light of these observations, the fact that during the years in which the fres- coes in the San Lorenzo choir16 were being commissioned the COSIMO THE ELDER, COSIMO I, payments to Pontormo were included in the public fabbrice- AND THE BASILICA OF SAN LORENZO ria of the “Castello” can be interpreted not only as a conve- Cosimo I’s involvement in reforming the state and consolidat- nient solution—a way of transferring the account from one ing his power, from his succession to Duke Alessandro (1537) sector to another, a frequent maneuver during the early years to his rise to the rank of grand duke (1569), were designed of Cosimo’s government17—but also as a decision associated to place the Republican bureaucratic structures under abso- with (and encouraged by) the nature of the artist’s pictorial lute control and assert strict control over the city’s ancient commission. The appointment of Tribolo (from 1542), and institutions,10 as was the case with the Opera of Santa Maria subsequently of Vasari, as church architects18 highlights the del Fiore, or with the Santa Maria Nuova and Innocenti hos- church as part of the architectural heritage managed by the pitals. San Lorenzo was no exception, and its identification state, and therefore by the duke, according to the usual iden- with the Medici was felt even more strongly than elsewhere. tification and mixture that characterized the societies of the However, control over the church and the chapter of San ancien régime. Lorenzo was not easily achieved (particularly during the early This complex situation more clearly accounts for years of the Principato), given the objective discontinuity Cosimo I’s approach to San Lorenzo: at times, the duke between the elder (“Cosmiadi”) and younger (“Popolani”) be haved as if he held real patronage rights over the basilica, branches of the Medici family and the very nature of the even if those rights had no legal standing. At the same time, rights that the line of Cosimo (pater patriae) had over the he was wary and careful of how he moved in the invisible church. Cosimo the Elder and his son Piero, in assuming but solid network of patronage and beneficial rights—above responsibility, respectively, for the completion of the pres- all those that were considered the prerogative of the “main” bytery area through the construction of the main chapel and branch of the Medici, whose last descendant was Catherine for establishing the assignment of the chapels (and thus the de’ Medici, queen of France,19 and more generally, with regard chapel rights) in the nave to finance the construction, played to the delicate matter of canon law and ecclesiastical law, also a very important role in the basilica vis-à-vis the chapter and in light of the council’s reflections and subsequent decrees.20 the city, comparable to the position usually associated with If we now analyze the second duke of Florence’s actions, the holders of general, real patronage.11 This situation was we see a clear shift in his attitude during the course of his considerably consolidated by the endowments and actions long reign. Cosimo and his sons developed a strategy for of Leo X and Clement VII on behalf of the church;12 however, controlling the chapter, the prior of which was a figure of pri- no known document certifies to any total ius patronatus of the mary importance in Florence’s ecclesiastical hierarchy, sec- Medici over the entire basilica, that is, to a privilege granted ond only to the archbishop of Florence. This involved quick, by a title, deed, or special papal bull. Given the problematic stringent actions of which no mention was made, of course, in nature of this issue, it should be said that both Cosimo I and the celebratory, encomiastic words of their biographers and Alessandro de’ Medici before him were in a position to partly historians, but which clearly emerge from the resolutions overcome the strict patronage rights of the elder branch of and documents of that time. In fact, the chapter’s documents the Medici (over the Old Sacristy, the chapel of Sts. Cosmas enable us to reconstruct the evolution of the duke’s surveil- and Damian, the greater chapel, the area beneath the cross- lance policy. The operai were established within the chap- ing, the New Sacristy, and the Tribuna delle Reliquie), while ter. These officers, present, albeit not constantly, between at the same time circumventing domestic hereditary ques- the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and reintroduced on tions and overcoming the formalisms of canon law. In fact, a standing basis by Alessandro de’ Medici, controlled and as “heads of the Republic,”13 thanks to an order promulgated audited the chapter’s accounts.21 In 1538, this role was held in 1532, the dukes, and subsequently the grand dukes, were by Francesco Inghirami and Ottaviano de’ Medici. While given the role of “preservers”/protectors of the basilica, there is no need to stress the importance of Ottaviano,22 by virtue of the 1417 provision with which the priors had the role of Inghirami as “commissioner and superintendent Sacred Space and Architecture in the Patronage of the First Grand Duke of Tuscany 505 22.1. Archivio del Capitolo di San Lorenzo, frontispiece to Bollario Laurenziano, ca. 1680. (Photo: Opera Medicea Laurenziana.) of the poor beggars” from 154023 merits mention. When surrounding the frescoes by Pontormo in the basilica of San Ottaviano died in 1546, Cosimo I entrusted this position to Lorenzo.26 In 1547 Riccio ordered that the canons accept the Giovan Battista Ginori, another important figure within the appointment of two figures chosen by Cosimo, who were to Medici’s senior bureaucracy.24 Cosimo could also rely on a be “in charge of the service and decoration of the church”;27 sort of lieutenant within the chapter: from 1530 onward, Pier moreover, Pier Francesco personally intervened in archi- Francesco Riccio—childhood tutor and then first secretary tectural questions, such as the arrangement of the dome in of Cosimo I25—sat in the choir of San Lorenzo as chaplain the Old Sacristy.28 Cosimo imposed a further form of con- and then canon.