Bernini: contributions in St. Peters under Urban VIII

Jenny Wang
Honors Program in Rome - Summer 2008

Gian Lorenzo Bernini is seen as one of the most influential and talented architect of the 17th century. His genius was found at a very young age, and his dedication earned him the respect of many popes of the Roman Baroque. Pope Urban VIII, also known as Maffeo Barberini, was Gian Lorenzo’s greatest patron. Maffeo Barberini took an immediate interest to Bernini’s talent when the two met during Bernini’s commissions at the Villa Borghese. Barberini was a cardinal then, and he made Bernini a papal knight by the time Bernini was 23. A year later, Barberini was named Pope with a landslide of 50 out of 55 votes; Barberini was only 55 at this time, very young for a Pope. When he received this title, Barberini summoned Bernini to tell him: “It is your great good luck, Cavaliere, to see Maffeo Barberini pope. But we are even luckier in that the Cavaliere Bernini lives at the time of our pontificate.” Barberini and Bernini were so close Bernini visited the Pope whenever he wanted, accompanied him to the bedside, and drew the window curtains for him. Bernini acquired a huge number of commissions during Barberini’s reign of 21 years, and he was one of the most richly rewarded and highest paid artists in the world.

The main event during Barberini’s papacy was the Thirty Years War, a clash of Catholicism with Protestantism which had grown out of the Holy Roman Empire to spread throughout Europe. Barberini’s main objective throughout his papacy was to restore Catholicism in Europe; he had a lot of set plans for the church, the papacy, and how they were to be seen at the time. Barberini was a fervent supporter of Catholic missions across the globe. He created dioceses and vicariates in pagan countries, founded the Collegium Urbanum in 1627 (its objective to train missionaries to go abroad) as well as a college for the Maronites on Mt. Lebanon in 1625, and he also attempted to reinstate Catholicism in England. Because of this as well as his reputation as patron of the arts, the Roman people heartily welcomed his pontificate. While most of Barberini’s actions are attributed to his commitment to restoring Catholicism in Europe, he also had personal agendas. Due to the fact he was young and his family was not from Rome (and only modestly wealthy) he felt the need to truly establish his legitimacy as pope, develop his family name, and make sure all the Roman people understand he had been “chosen” to be Pope.

Under Urban VIII, Bernini produced great pieces of art with important messages. Pope Urban VIII carefully detailed the symbolism behind each commissioned artwork to prove the legitimacy of his papacy and the Barberini family name. Unfortunately for Barberini, support of his pontificate slowly trickled away by the end of his reign due to his excessive nepotism and accumulation of large debts. Bernini was a central figure in ensuring the continued support of the Roman people even at the end of Barberini’s papacy.

The Baldacchino
The original altarpiece over St. Peter’s tomb was erected in the Thanksgiving of 324 AD by Constantine, the first Roman Christian Emperor. Saint Peter was the first Pope, and the altar served to both venerate him as well as display the most important relic of the church: St. Peter’s body. Historically, the baldacchino was a temporary structure, and it underwent many transformations before Bernini’s final design. The entire church of St. Peters had actually been rebuilt, starting in the time of Pope Julius II (1506) with the exterior finally finished in 1617. Originally Pope Gregory XV had commissioned Maderno to construct the full-sized model of the baldacchino, but he died before the project was finished. Urban VIII gladly took over the project of installing the permanent baldacchino, an enormous undertaking to highlight the connection between papal power and the imperial benevolence of Constantine. Within five days of Maderno’s death, Urban VIII had appointed Bernini as the chief architect of St. Peters. Bernini started work on the baldacchino in 1624; it was his first grand architectural endeavor. Bernini had a distinctive take on architecture: he believed the good architect combined the beautiful with the necessary but the best architect was the one to turn necessities and defects into beauty. Bernini believed strongly in basing architecture in antiquity, although he did feel bending the rules was necessary sometimes.


Bernini’s baldacchino (1624-33) drew from one important idea of Maderno’s: the twisted columns, not staves, supporting the altar. However, the original Maderno design had angels at the foot of the columns, and Bernini made an important change by moving the angels to the top because columns stand independently and need not to be held up by angels. The twisted columns, also called Solomonic columns, recall the columns of the original Constantinian altar as well as the twisted columns in the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem. This symbolizes the union of the Old Testament (under Solomon) and the Christian rule of Constantine.

The bronze used in the columns came from the Pantheon’s porch; Urban VIII had ordered the bronze supports to be dismantled to be used in St. Peters. His stripping of 927 tons of Pantheon bronze in 1633 elicited the quote "Quod non fecerunt barbari, fecerunt Barberini" (What wasn't done by the barbarians was done by the Barberini). Each bronze column was hollow-cast in three pieces; the shafts cast in three pieces and joined separately. Bernini used the lost wax process, where the mold is sandwiched between a heat-resistant core and cover. The wax is the primary sculpting material which made up the positive image against the negative encasing material. Bronze is then melted and poured down into the channels where the wax was; the wax then melts and is drained so the metal can take its original shape. A myth also mentions the use of the lost lizard process, where Bernini would use real animals such as lizards, fruit, leaves, and bees in the wax to capture more realistic details. Because the columns are hollow, it was not enough to secure and stabilize the structure. Thus each shaft’s cavity was filled with concrete to increase its compressive strength.

Bernini raised the columns to rest upon marble pedestals carved with the family crest and portraits of Urban VIII’s niece and her newborn son. Raising the columns made the papal symbols on the bronze especially visible, allowing Bernini to cast symbols to compliment his patron. Even though the Christian vine leaves were customary at the time (representing the Eucharist), Bernini picked vine leaves that looked similar to the laurel leaves of the Barberini family crest to be shown on the columns. Instead of butterflies, Bernini put in the “Barberini bees”. Bees were revered at the time for their attraction to the sweetness of “holiness”, so this replacement showed the sanctity of the structure as well as the connection of the Barberini family with the baldacchino. At the top of each column the Barberini sun is also depicted.


The canopy Bernini designed was especially a phenomenon of its time, violating the rules of what architecture was supposed to be. It was customary for the canopy to be made of a separate element that the structure; usually it was cloth or silk. However, Bernini also made the canopy out of bronze with bronze tassels, so it looks ephemeral yet very durable. The tassels also show the three bees of Barberini and the cherub, alternately. The originally crowning feature of the baldacchino was to be a figure of the Risen Christ. A change was made, very late in the construction, to replace the Risen Christ with an orb and cross. Historians argue this change may have been due to structural concerns, which were mostly iconographical; Bernini may have strayed from the original plan because he wanted to switch out the Eucharist symbol with a more general symbol of the religion.

The angels atop the superstructure look to be airy and graceful despite the fact they are twice life size and solid bronze. They reach out to support the structure, formed by S-shaped curves, with a garland of flowers, holding the canopy distinctly above the columns as to not connect the two. The “ribs” of the superstructure rest on the columns much less heavily than earlier versions and look as if it were “lifted” from the columns. This structure also helps carry the viewer’s eye straight up into Michelangelo’s dome, uninterrupted. The Barberini family crest is displayed prominently in the center of the superstructure, and pairs of putti lean over the rim at the top. These putti each hold a great amount of symbolism and emphasize holiness on earth through papal power. One holds St. Peter’s keys, reinstating the fact St. Peter was the first Pope; another holds the papal tiara directly below the apex of the dome, connecting the power of the papacy with the light of the heavens, reminding the viewer St. Peter was the chosen one of Jesus to build the church; and the putti on the back side of the baldacchino hold a book and sword, symbolizing St. Paul.

The baldacchino was not formally unveiled until the feast of Saint Peter in 1633. The baldacchino had cost more than 200,000 scudi in the making (one scudi could buy four loaves of bread), and it was a stunning success. The baldacchino was the perfect art form to demonstrate the goals of Urban VIII for the church. The Catholic Church at the time of the baldacchino was primarily concerned with keeping Catholicism strong and to spread it throughout Europe. The baldacchino accentuates just how holy the papacy is, for St. Peters is the first pope and all popes are chosen by God; this served to restore faith in both the Pope and remind the viewer of just how powerful Catholicism is. Urban VIII was readily able to incorporate his family symbols (bees, laurel leaves, sunbursts) into the baldacchino, effectively melding himself into the very structure of the holiest altar in the empire. The symbolism Bernini used in the baldacchino is subtle enough as to not detract from the structure itself, but prevalent enough to be noticed and remembered. The columns remind the viewer of the column of Trajan, recalling times of prosperity; the bronze canopy, innovative for the time, garnered Urban VIII the respect of viewers and architects alike. The placement of the putti with a papal tiara and the keys of Peter solidify the connection of the Barberini family with the papal heritage and continue the idea of the Barberini family as the chosen family.

Cathedra Petri

Cathedra Petri is the oak throne of St. Peter in the St. Peters basilica; it is framed by the baldacchino’s columns and forms the climax for the viewer of the nave. This was possibly Bernini’s most complex experiment with the dosage of light. Bernini was commissioned to build a reliquary—a type of container for relics—as to house the ancient wooden chair believed to be used by St. Peter himself. This chair symbolizes the recognition of St. Peter as the first Pope, and the seat will forever be his. The throne is composed of red jasper, black Sicilian marble, masses of bronze, some gilt, stone, iron, marble statuary, yellow glass, and golden stucco clouds. Before Bernini’s design, completed in 1666, was in place, an ancient wooden chair held the place as early as the 8th century; but the ivory plaques depicting the Labors of Hercules were added later.

The base of the chair is made of colored marble. The Doctors of the church stand on either side of the throne and are made of gilded bronze; St. Ambrose and St. Augustine are to the right as the father and Doctors of the Latin church (west) and St. Athanasius and St. John Chrysostom are to the left as the doctor and father of the Greek church (from the east). The doctors serve as a bridge, showing Catholic unity across Europe; together the doctors miraculously seem to “hold aloft” the chair itself, showing the work of the doctors in supporting the church. There are three bas-reliefs on the throne: ones on the sides show the life of St. Peter, including the scene of the Washing of the Feet and the Handing Over of the Keys. The clearest bas-relief is on the back of the throne which depicts Christ as the Good Sheppard letting St. Peter take care of his flock of sheep (pasce oves meas). The top of the monument, commonly known as “Glory”, is framed by a stained glass window featuring the dove (symbolizing the Holy Spirit) in midst of 12 rays (symbolizing the 12 apostles). While Bernini often used hidden windows in his work to ensure the proper light to shine upon his work, the Glory is a different approach. The original light from the window was too strong, so Bernini softened it with yellow glass and added the dove to inspire the sense of holiness in its viewers.

This structure serves very well to show the strength of Catholicism across uncommon lands, people, and culture. United in faith, both east and west understand the importance of the reliefs on the throne: these panels represent the right of papal succession and the divine blessing of God given to the Pope to care for his people. The setting of the throne is also important; after the viewer has taken in the baldacchino, they look beyond the high altar to see a holy light streaming in from the stained glass window with the Holy Spirit at the center, framed by a golden stucco of angels. This scene shows God watching over the Pope he has appointed, and he ready to welcome St. Peter, and his descendants, into Heaven.

Tomb of Matilda

Countess Matilda of Canossa, who lived 1046-1115, was one of the most powerful women of the Middle Ages and a benefactress of Holy See. Her family had extensive possessions in middle and upper Italy. Even though Matilda’s father was a support of the German emperors and moved against the Papacy in the factional struggle, Matilda remained faithful. While her most known donation is the lands known as the Patrimony of St. Peters, she is also “credited with many religious donations, foundations, and constructions of former territories” (Holman, 638) as well building abbeys, churches, hospitals, and cathedrals. She became a close friend of Pope Gregory VII, supporting him in his struggle against Henry IV. In 1082 she also sent part of Canossa’s famous treasure to Rome to help the Pope with his war efforts; after she died, she bequeathed her possessions to the church. After Henry IV was excommunicated, Matilda was still sporadically at war with him until 1106 (when he died); sometimes she would even wear armor and lead the troops. Matilda was truly the epitome of the medieval female and was put on par with St. Helena and Empress Placida.

Urban VIII was a great admirer of the Countess; he owned a portrait of her and had composed a poem singing her praise. He commissioned Bernini to design a funeral monument for Countess Matilda in 1633 “as an example to other princes” (Holman, 653). The statue of the Matilda is not by Bernini, however, but by his student Andrea Bolgi. In the sculpture, Matilda is commandingly holding a baton as well as the papal tiara and keys. Having Matilda pose in this stature, Urban VIII was showing his support of religious war. The bas-relief below her monument is by Stefano Speranza, depicting the scene of Henry IV kneeling before Gregory VII in Matilda’s castle in Canossa. Henry IV had waited barefoot for 3 days and 3 nights to see Pope Gregory VII until he was finally let in on January 28th, 1077. This reinforces the triumph of Catholicism and the papacy over Protestantism. The angel on the right supporting the inscription is also by Bolgi, and the one on the left is by Bernini’s brother, Luigi. The crown and coat of arms have the motto “TUETUR ET UNIT” (Protects and Unites).

The body of Matilda was originally housed at Polirone, but Urban VIII wished to have her remains transported to Rome. The body was stolen in the dark of the night and arrived in Rome in March 10th, 1634; it was laid to rest in the second pier on the right isle of St. Peters. The monument to Countess Matilda, accessible to the general public, is visibly the only tomb in St. Peters not dedicated to a former pope. This dedication of space in the basilica exemplifies the idea truly church-loving individuals can rise to the level where they are venerated with the popes. Urban VIII wanted to foster a deeper sense of connection with the Church for the average attendee, and Matilda was the perfect role model.

Transept
The four piers of the transept support the dome of St. Peters, each containing a niche holding a statue. The transept forms strong diagonals with the baldacchino, making it visually pleasing and naturally drawing the attention of the viewer. Above the statues Bernini formed staircases on the balconies, framed by twisted columns, to show the four most important relics of St. Peters. In each balcony angels are carved, holding the relic. The sky in which they fly is made of yellow marble and the clouds are purple marble.

Bernini only designed one of the statues, St. Longinus, and the others were commissioned to his students. The other statues are of St. Veronica (Francesco Mochi), St. Andrew (Francois Duquesnoy), and St. Helena (Andreas Bolgi). St. Longinus is of the traditional Roman soldier who pierced Jesus on the side while on the Cross using the Spear of Destiny. In medieval tales, the blood of Chris cures Longinus’ blindness; he then realizes Christ truly is the son of God and instantly converts to Christianity. St. Veronica was a woman from Jerusalem so moved by Jesus as he carried his cross to Golgotha she offered him her veil so he could clean his face. St. Helena was the mother of Constantine the Great, and St. Andrews, brother of St. Peter, was martyred on a diagonal cross. St. Peters houses the Spear of Destiny, the veil of Veronica, a fragment of the True Cross discovered by St. Helena, and the head of St. Andrews, respectively.


Finally finishing his sculpture of St. Longinus in 1632, Bernini redesigned his sculpture 22 times (many times discussing ideas with the Pope himself). Bernini’s sculpture stands roughly 15 feet tall. St. Longinus is depicted with his arm thrust out, holding a spear, as he seems to come into realization of the true name of Christ. His figure extends so much it seems to occupy the entire niche; his left leg is stretched out and his right leg is at the edge of the pedestal, as if he is going to jump out of the space he is in. His cloak is falling back and his hair is ruffled, as if blown by some spiritual force of the revelation. Just like Bernini’s David, St. Longinus is in action—his muscles are striated, giving it a texture the other smooth statues do not have and making him seem more three-dimensional and realistic. He looks towards the altarpiece, which helps complete his story and lets the baldacchino recapture the viewer’s attention.

Flanked by four compelling statues in a single moment of realization, the transept is a strong reminder of the sanctity of the church, which contains several category one relics. Urban VIII used the transept as a tool for communicating with the public audience: he reconstructs the story of our four saints, places them next to the holy altar of St. Peters, and freezes each statue in a moment of revelation as they look up at the altar and heavens. Viewers recognize how sacred the Catholic history is, how powerful and everlasting their faith is, and realizes the example set by these four figures that have changed history.

Conclusion
St. Peters is an amazing fusion of papal propaganda and artistic mastery; everything about the church is carefully constructed with symbolism and intent. Bernini succeeded in making St. Peters one of the most powerful and grandiose churches of its time. In the 16th century when the pilgrims or commoners came from miles away to pray, they would first walk through the piazza. There, they were transfixed by the size and grandeur of nearly a hundred statues around them. Walking up the stairs, they would see the relief of Christ handing over St. Peters the keys to heaven as well as the pedestrian statues of Constantine and Charlemagne. Surrounded by two key figures of Christian history and the knowledge of what sacred relic were inside this church—St. Peter’s body—they would have been in awe. Once inside the church, the huge monuments still looked proportional. It was only as they approached the baldacchino from the nave would they realize the size and holiness of the altarpiece. Looking up into Michelangelo’s dome they would see the beautiful light of heaven. Framed perfectly by the baldacchino would be the Throne of Peter, the “glory” of the golden angels atop it, and the hidden stained-glass window where holy light seem to appear from behind the dove. Surrounding the baldacchino would be the four other main relics in the church, symbolized by the statues of the saints below, reminding them of the sacrifice made by Jesus for faith. Visiting St. Peters would have been the experience of a lifetime, and Urban VIII took the opportunity to create a lasting impression in the minds of its viewers.

The propaganda in St. Peters is only thinly disguised. Urban VIII had a very specific message for Bernini to portray before any of his work even started. The theme of papal succession, legitimizing Urban VIII’s reign and the Barberini family name, is a prominent feature of the church. The Barberini family symbols are everywhere in the church, allowing the churchgoer to forge a connection between the family and the papal power present in St. Peters. Even the most hesitant Romans would eventually come to associate the bees with the Barberini name with St. Peters basilica. It would seem ridiculous for any of the viewing subjects to question the legitimacy of Urban VIII’s right to the throne; he was the one who finished the church to make it one of the most beautiful and the holiest places on earth, where only the Pope can conduct ceremony at the high altar. St. Peters was Urban VIII’s way to give thanks to the people, give them something to take pride in, and show himself as the “chosen” pope by God to make this church. Even now, tourists and natives alike know Urban VIII’s name because St. Peters basilica has become a part of his history and vice versa.

Despite the massive size of the church, Bernini made sure all his works looked fitting in its setting—no one architectural piece dominated the entire space. Perhaps his greatest feat in the church was his ability to always have the big picture in mind; he was able to carry out the plans of Barberini with taste. He glorified the Barberini family, the papacy as a chosen instrument of God, and shed good light on Urban VIII’s reign. Yet as he was incorporating these explicit messages in his work, he was still able to capture the feel of the church and give the Roman people a holy space they would rejoice in. As quoted by Rudolph Wittkower, “Bernini never lost sight of the whole.”

Bibliography
Borsi, Franco. Bernini. New York: Rizzoli, 1984

Hibbard, Howard. Bernini. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1966

Marder, Tod A. Bernini and the Art of Architecture. New York : Abbeville Press, 1998

Scriber III, Charles. Gianlorenzo Bernini. New York : H.N. Abrams, Publishers, 1991.

Fabrizio Mancinelli, “Rome, §V, 14(ii)(b): St Peter's: Decoration: 1504 and after."
Grove Dictionary of Art Online. 10 July 2008.

Irving Lavin, Bernini and the Crossing of Saint Peter's. New York: New York University Press,
1968.

Rudolph Preimesberger and M. Mezzatesta, "The St Peter's baldacchino and other works for Urban VIII, 1623-44," The Grove Dictionary of Art Online. 1 July 2008.

Rudolph Wittkower, Bernini. London: Phaidon Press Ltd., 1955

Holman, Beth L. “Exemplum and Imitatio: Countess Matilda and Lucrezia Pico della Mirandola
at Polirone”. The Art Bulletin. Vol. 81, No. 4 (Dec., 1999), pp. 637-664

A Rome Worthy of Il Duce’s Attention

Genesis Han
Honors Program in Rome - Summer 2008

In 1861, after years of unrest between individual cities states, Italy finally became a unified country. However, this new cobblestone nation was without identity and in political shambles until Fascist leader Benito Mussolini came to power. As Prime Minister from 1922-1943, Mussolini united Italy, more specifically Rome, into the image that the world sees today. Connecting the new Rome with its glorious past, Mussolini took advantage of his vehement charisma and power over propaganda to breed his Fascist ideals into the heart of Italy through his public projects.

Born on July 29, 1883 into a humble family from Predappio, no one expected Mussolini to be a figure to change the history of the nation. Although receiving good grades in school, he developed a defiant and boisterous nature which followed him even when he became certified as a schoolteacher. Mussolini initially embraced his socialist background of his father, Alessandro Mussolini a blacksmith and socialist activist. In 1902, unable to find a job, he moved to Switzerland to find a job and expand his political horizons. Unsuccessful, he moved back to Italy and became a political journalist. In addition, he volunteered for military service. After joining the war effort in 1915, he came to the stark realization that socialism caused more problems than it solved and continued as the editor-in-chief of his own paper Il Popolo d’Italia. Similarly, many Italians saw the fallacies of socialism as the solution to all the post war problems, setting the stage for Mussolini’s rise to power.

During the years after WWI, Russia’s Bolsheviks revolution gave much confidence to Italy’s socialist party; however the populace had a waning confidence in a revolution which led to the party’s disintegration. Following the war, Italy experienced an economic backlash that translated to an increase in unemployment and inflation lowering the confidence in the socialist part. This was not helped by the property distribution issues caused by veterans came back demanding their land. Seeing the weakness and disorganization of the liberal government set up after WWI, militant socialists took it into their own hands and used a series of worker insurrections to gain power. This social uproar through labor militancy acts and the occupations of the factory by the Red Guards did not sway the socialist party leaders to escalate the revolution onto a Bolsheviks scale. However, it was the continued economic disintegration which caused socialism to lose support; Italy was left with a desperate need for leadership.Fascism emerged as way out of a Bolshevik-like revolution in Italy. By 1922, the economic recession united 300,000 members by blaming socialism for the nation’s problems. But, not all Fascist support was voluntary. Through intimidation and violence, the squadristi, or blackshirts, gained territorial support and were even sponsored by landowners, businessmen, and the police who were often targeted by socialists. The blackshirts were often hard to control because of their radical nature, making them a threatening force to Mussolini’s authority. Later, the major squad leaders recognized his political initiative and backed him as the leader of the Partito Nazionale Fascista. With their support, Mussolini quickly climbed to the top, placing the fascist party in the election, and by all means, worked to eliminate any competition.

The fascist party staged a coup and experienced its greatest victory on October 28, 1922. Threatening civil war, an army of 30,000 squadristi marched from Milan to Rome through “the path of ancient greatness” to take the country’s capital (Scott 646). However, this group that may not have even marched was less than intimidating because most were ill-armed. Regardless of the number of men, King Victor Emmanuel conceded to avoid bloodshed and asked Mussolini to form a government. Mussolini became Italy’s youngest prime minister at the age of 39 and held office for 21 years. As an act of glorification of Rome and himself, Mussolini later described this event as a march of 300,000 men, led personally by him on horseback. This exaggeration serves as a testament to his charisma which is seen as a major theme throughout his political career in his speeches, commissioned artwork, and especially his personality. He quickly gained the support of many nationalists; Mussolini declared himself Il duce in 1926 and strategically imposed his own hyper-nationalism to create a new Italian identity.


Mussolini with his ideals and political ardor revived the city of Rome, creating a grand spectacle for the rest of the world. He desired to transform the decaying city by “destroy[ing] the old to create the new and uncover the glories of the imperial past” (Painter 3). With the start of several construction projects, historical Rome rose out of the ground and the slums were torn down. In addition, identifying his own dynasty with Emperor Augustus’, he stressed the idea of romanita and recycled Roman history for his own political purposes. His obsession with Augustus brought focus and grandeur to a troubled nation, which united the people with a sense of pride to the youth, a new generation of Italians. Mesmerized by the Duce’s oratorical skills, Italians were captivated by and gave way to the fascist idea of the revival of the Italian strength, youth and energy. Winning the public, Mussolini incorporated these fascist ideals into the reconstruction of Rome.


Tearing down the slums, liberating ancient monuments, and improving the city for the modern age, Mussolini effectively used social projects to proclaim the essential fascist messages. During the late 1920s, several public construction programs of repristination that gave “older sites new fascist imprints” (Painter 7). The transformation began with excavation and demolition of the Imperial Fora. Although unveiling the key Roman Fora of Trajan, Augustus, Caesar, and Nerva, parts of these were left buried by the creation of a thirty meter wide street, Via dell’Impero, connecting the Colosseum to Piazza Venezia, Mussolini’s headquarter. But more was unveiled than lost. The superimposition of the beautiful ruins and the modern use of this street embody the notion of romanita as well as a surge into an energetic city center. On October 28, 1932, Rome celebrated the tenth anniversary of the March on Rome and the opening of Via dell’Impero. Running through the Imperial Fora, statues of the Roman emperors, and later, the four maps, this street became the site of many fascist celebrations and parades similar to the triumphal processions that took place in Roman times. Processions ended at the Piazza Venezia where Mussolini often gave speeches off the small balcony towards the roaring crowd. The glory of ancient Rome ordained the successes of Mussolini’s Rome, legitimizing his governance, as these grand parades caught everyone’s attention. Just the completion of this massive project and archeological feat empowered the fascist wave through Italy – however, the biggest propaganda piece was not added to the street until two years after the opening.


Though ordained with past artworks, Mussolini unveiled of the four maps in April 1934, on the anniversary of the founding of Rome and Fascist Labour Day, to further the idea of Fascist self-definition through its portrayal of past and present imperialism. Posted on the side of the Basilica of Maxentius, each map is about 4.6 square meters, held by two imperial eagles and made of different colored marbles to easily distinguish the sea, the Roman Empire, and the unconquered areas. The maps are arranged chronologically, depicting the 8th century BC, 146 BC, 14 AD, and 98-117 AD, so that when viewed together, one could understand the expansion of Rome throughout history. Shown in white marble, ancient Rome would move further to bring civilization and light into the peripheral lands shown by the black marble. These propagandistic maps affirmed the fascist regime in their own imperialist attitude and a fifth map, revealed on October 28, 1936, proudly displayed Mussolini’s grasp into Ethiopia. Adding to its use as a commemoratory piece, the fifth map was dedicated to fascist martyrs. Mussolini was able to impart fascist ideals even in the smallest of details while leading Italians to draw parallels with the glories of the past with the ones of their new Duce.


Mussolini continued to reconstruct Rome into a fascist center until WWII, extracting the grandeur of ancient Rome for his own agenda. Mussolini’s identification as the new Augustus, justified the need to canonize the ancient emperor. In celebration of Augustus’ 2000th birthday, the Piazza Augusto Imperatore was created with the restoration of the Ara Pacis and mausoleum. Followed by the construction of the Exhibit of Fascist Revolution and the EUR, Mussolini’s belief “that the glories of the past [should be] surpassed by the glories of the future” were stressed by the museum’s simple but bold architecture and the sports arena’s support for Italian strength and fitness (Painter 77). From the repristination of the monuments of Augustus to the fascist architecture of the EUR, Mussolini’s public programs exhibited the solidarity and strength of his political party and reign.

Mussolini’s use of propaganda increased as Italy entered WWII on the side of the Axis. He continued his captivating speeches, uniting Italians. Although feverishly cheering at the sound of Mussolini’s voice projecting from the balcony of Piazza Venezia, many of the people could not hear his speech about joining the war effort. Furthermore, he held a grand celebration to welcome Adolf Hitler when he visited Rome and was showed around Via dell’Impero. Ironically, German troops marched down this very street when occupying Italy at the turn of the war.

Finally, Mussolini was overthrown in July 1943 when the Grand Council of Fascism withdrew confidence in him. When executed in 1945, many of the fascist symbols such as the piccone and fascio, which represented his political projects and the idea of strength in numbers, were taken down from buildings and art around the city as well as the fifth map on the side of the Basilica of Maxentius. Likewise, many of the names of his public works were changed from their fascist façade as a symbol of removing fascism and restoring a greater Italian purpose. Via dell’Impero became Via dei Fori Imperiali and Foro Mussolini became Foro Italico. These anti-fascist sentiments unified Italy more than Mussolini was able to achieve with fascism. Though in some cases destructive, one can not ignore the amount of resources Mussolini poured into the transformation of Rome in order to create propaganda to legitimize his government and project him and the fascist revolution.
---------------------
Works Cited
Agnew, John. "The Impossible Capital: Monumental Rome under Liberal and Fascist Regimes, 1870-1943." Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography 80.4 (1998): 229-240. JSTOR. 27 Apr. 2008 .
Lyons, Carolyn. "The Empire's New Clothes For Mussolini, Rome and Architecture Became Twin Obsessions." Financial Times 25 Aug. 2007, Surveys ed.: 24. ProQuest Newsstand International. ProQuest. U of Washington, Seattle, WA. 25 Apr. 2008 .
Minor, Heather Hyde. “Mapping Mussolini: Ritual and Cartography in Public Art during the Second Roman Empire.” Imago Mundi 51 (1999): 147-162. JSTOR. U of Washington, Seattle, WA. 23 July. 2008 .
Mras, George P. "Italian Fascist Architecture: Theory and Image." Art Journal 21.1 (Fall 1961): 7-12. JSTOR. 27 Apr. 2008 .
Packer, James E. "Report from Rome: The Imperial Fora, a Retrospective." American Journal of Archaeology 101.2 (Apr. 1997): 307-330. JSTOR. U of Washington, Seattle, WA. 25 Apr. 2008 .
Painter, Borden W., Jr. Mussolini's Rome: Rebuilding the Eternal City. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005.
Scott, Kenneth. "Mussolini and the Roman Empire." The Classic Journal 27.9 (June 1932): 645-657. JSTOR. U of Washington, Seattle, WA. 23 July 2008 .

Geometry vs. Theatricality: A Comparison of Style between Borromini’s San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane and Bernini’s San Andrea al Quirinale

Catharine Killien
Honors Program in Rome - Summer 2008

Introduction
Standing atop the Quirinal Hill, opposite the imposing and seemingly endless façade of the Quirinal Palace, two small churches act as the most iconic representations of the rival architects who transformed the Roman Baroque era: Gian Lorenzo Bernini and Francesco Borromini. Although Bernini and Borromini worked at the same time, in the same city, and on many of the same projects, they could not have been more different. While Bernini was charming, ambitious, and well connected with the powerful papal families of Rome, Borromini was antisocial, inflexible, and difficult to work with. Perhaps a result of their diverging personalities, Bernini and Borromini had incredibly different approaches to architecture: Bernini saw architecture as a staging of an experience, and used theatricality and drama in his design to heighten the visitor’s emotional and spiritual response. Borromini, on the other hand, stretched the limits of classical architecture that had made a revival during the Renaissance by distorting pure classical elements to create dynamic, sculptural spaces. These vastly different approaches to design presented two distinct visions of what baroque architecture was, and nowhere is this difference better illustrated than in the quintessential works of the two architects: Bernini’s San Andrea al Quirinale and Borromini’s San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane.
Despite their differences in personality and architectural style, Bernini and Borromini had surprisingly similar upbringings. Both were born at the dawn of the 17th century to successful craftsmen and began their careers very young at a time of vibrant building and patronage of the arts in Rome. Gian Lorenzo Bernini was born in Naples in 1598 to the successful Mannerist sculptor, Pietro Bernini. Upon coming to Rome at age 7, Bernini’s skill was quickly recognized and he was brought to the Vatican to be mentored by Cardinal Borghese, the pope’s nephew. Under Borghese’s patronage, the child protégé quickly rose to become the preeminent sculptor of Rome. Bernini’s lifelong rival, Francesco Borromini was born in Lombardy in 1599 to a master stone mason, and went to Milan at age 10 to work as a sculptor’s apprentice. At age 16, he moved to Rome, where he began his work as a decorative sculptor at St. Peter’s under the guidance of Carlo Maderno, a distant relative and the chief architect of St. Peter’s basilica. Borromini thrived under Maderno’s instruction, developing excellent technical and drafting skills that would become his most important advantage over Bernini in coming years.

Rivalry
The skilled architectural draftsman and the master sculptor didn’t cross paths until 1624, when Urban VIII became pope and commissioned Bernini to design the baldacchino for St. Peter’s. Bernini and Borromini worked on St. Peter’s together for the next 9 years, a collaboration that was instrumental in the development of each man’s individual architectural style and spurred the rivalry that spanned the next four decades. Although Borromini was responsible for many of the technical aspects and for a large part of the design of the baldacchino, his contributions received little notice and the baroque masterpiece was credited to Bernini. When Borromini’s mentor, Maderno, died in 1629, Urban VIII appointed Bernini the new chief architect for St. Peter’s. Borromini was infuriated by this decision—he felt cheated and was convinced that he deserved the position because he had worked for so long under Maderno and knew the details of St. Peters, while Bernini was simply a young sculptor with no architectural experience. Further angering Borromini, Urban appointed Bernini the architect of Palazzo Barberini, a position previously held by Maderno. Despite the grudge Borromini held over Bernini, Borromini was persuaded to work as an assistant for Bernini, as Bernini acknowledged that he would need Borromini’s technical skill for the completion of the two important commissions. However, as in St. Peter’s, Borromini’s work on Palazzo Barberini received little notice, and thanks to his overwhelming popularity at the time, Bernini received the majority of the credit and money for the project. Reacting to his second snub, Borromini stated, “I do not mind that he [Bernini] has the money, but I do mind that he enjoys the honor of my labors.”[1] Borromini eventually broke with Bernini’s workshop, abandoned his work on St. Peter’s and Palazzo Barberini, and devoted the rest of his career to his own architecture.

San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane
Borromini’s swift exit from two high-profile building projects appeared to his contemporaries to be reckless and self-destructive, but Borromini never showed any regret over his decision. In 1634 Borromini accepted his first independent commission to build a church and monastery for an impoverished Spanish order of Trinitarians who had acquired a small, irregular site on the top of the Quirinal Hill in Rome. The Trinitarians monks initially received financial support from Cardinal Francesco Barberini whose palace was across the street, but Barberini soon lost interest in the project and abandoned his patronage. San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane took over 40 years to complete, but the Trinitarians were well satisfied with Borromini’s final design. Despite the church’s originality and complexity, it was also practical and economical, costing only 11,678 scundi—a bargain by the standards of the time. Borromini accepted no money for the project, desiring only due credit for his work. The finished result is quintessentially Borromini: he was granted full artistic freedom in the design, and thus the church perfectly illustrates his architectural ideals.

A preview of Borromini’s spectacular design for the church can be seen in his design for the cloister at San Carlo, completed in 1635. By pushing the corner columns in towards the center to form a narrow octagon, Borromini successfully transformed a cramped rectangular courtyard into an energetic, vibrant space (Fig. 1). In February 1638, when Borromini was 38 years old, he began work on the church of San Carlo. Borromini faced limitations due to the irregular size and shape of the site: the two bounding streets were at obtuse angles and one corner of the site was cut off by a fountain that Pope Sixtus V had placed several years earlier. Although the asymmetry of the site presented difficulty, Borromini came up with an ingenious solution that reflects his incredible imagination and creativity at a time when the Baroque era was just reaching its climax in Rome.

Fig. 1: cloister, San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane

Geometry permeates every aspect of Borromini’s design for San Carlo, as he believed that geometry reflected the rationality of the world created by God. In his architectural design process, Borromini began with a simple plan, and gradually made it more complex and dynamic through a series of geometric manipulations of adding variations and distorting elements. San Carlo is based entirely on the geometry of the circle and the triangle—the two most elemental shapes in geometry and the most important images in Christianity: the triangle represents the holy trinity and the circle represents the eternity of God. Borromini designed the plan of San Carlo as an ellipse with the entrance and the high altar at opposite ends of the long axis, evoking a distorted Latin cross plan (Fig. 2). To create this oval shape, Borromini placed two equilateral triangles side by side and inscribed circles in each of them to create the outer curve of the ellipse. The geometry of the floor plan is reiterated in the top of the dome, the point of the church closest to heaven, where a dove—the symbol of The Holy Spirit—is enclosed in a triangle surrounded by a circle.

Fig. 2: plan, San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane

Borromini divided the space of the church into three distinct horizontal zones—the wall surface, the continuous entablature above the walls, and the dome floating on top—to create an effect of vertical ascension. Though there appears to be a lack of unity between the different levels, Borromini purposefully created this discontinuity to emphasize the progression from complex to simple geometries. The incredible sculptural treatment of the walls represents significant move away from the flat, crisp surfaces of Renaissance architecture and the plasticity of the surface forms an undulating curvilinear surface that is distinctly Borromini. The eight pairs of columns throughout the lower portion of the church provide essential order and support to the space, but are ingeniously set into the wall so they do not interrupt the dynamic flow of the wall. Above the wall surface, Borromini took a classical element—the entablature—and completely distorted it, giving it a free and vibrant expression (Fig. 3). The entablature runs continuously around the church, acting as a breaking point between the geometry of the wall and the geometry of the dome. While the lower levels appear complex and distorted, the pure oval shape of the dome illustrates that the design of the church is based on simple geometry (Fig. 4). On the interior surface of the dome, a series of complex geometrical shapes fit like pieces of a puzzle and become smaller near the top, making the dome seem taller than it actually is. The incredible progression from the complexity of the walls, to the distorted yet organizing entablature, to the pure oval shape of the dome beautifully illustrates Borromini’s idea of the baroque as something based on the classical architectural elements, but taken to a new level through the free expression of the architect.

Fig. 3: wall surface and entablature, San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane

Fig. 4: dome, San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane

In order to emphasize the geometry of the architecture, Borromini used relatively little decoration in San Carlo. While Bernini was known for his use of different artistic media to create a theatrical effect in a space, Borromini hoped to deliver the same sense of awe using only architecture. Aside from the altarpieces and the Trinitarian symbol—a red, equal sided cross—that appears throughout the church, the entire space is painted stark white, emphasizing Borromini’s incredible use of light to make the tiny church seem open and free. No windows permeate the wall surface but the church appears full of light due to the seemingly mysterious light sources at the base of the dome and the lantern. The few sculptures that do appear in the church—mostly winged cherubs, Borromini’s favorite motif—serve to bring out the architecture, not overpower it.

Though the church interior was completed in 1641, the façade wasn’t begun until 1665 and construction continued after Borromini’s death in 1667. The highly sculptural concave-convex façade is an incredible expression of the baroque sense of movement and influenced the design of later church facades throughout Rome (Fig. 5). While it is unclear how much of the façade was designed by Borromini, it is known that he planned for a curved façade when he designed the interior of the church in the late 1630s—before a single curved church façade existed in Rome.

San Carlo solidified Borromini’s reputation as a talented architect of unparalleled imagination and creativity. The church incited much talk when it was completed, as nothing quite like it had ever been seen in Rome. Borromini never received another commission that allowed him as much artistic freedom as San Carlo. While many of his later churches—particularly Sant’Ivo alla Sapienza—illustrate his same ideas about geometry and movement, San Carlo was his most famous commission. Following the completion of San Carlo, Borromini fell out of popularity under Alexander VII’s papacy—just when his lifelong rival, Gian Lorenzo Bernini, was coming back into the spotlight.

Fig. 5: facade, San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane

San Andrea al Quirinale
After a short period of decline under Pope Innocent X, Bernini regained his position as the preeminent sculptor and architect of Rome when Alexander XII rose to the papacy in 1655. In 1658, Bernini was selected by Alexander for the commission of San Andrea al Quirinale, a small Jesuit church atop the Quirinale hill, just a block away from Borromini’s San Carlo. San Andrea was built at the height of the Counter Reformation in Rome when Catholics were trying to bring people back to the church. The patron, Prince Camillo Pampilli, wanted an extravagant church that would show the glory of god, and Bernini delivered. Rather than simply designing a dynamic space, Bernini combined sculpture, painting, dramatic lighting, and architecture together to create a transcendent spiritual experience that aimed to restore people to Catholicism. Like Borromini at San Carlo, Bernini was granted full artistic freedom in his design, and thus San Andrea is a perfect illustration of his belief that through theatricality in design, architecture acts as a staging of an experience.

From the exterior, the rounded and lively entrance of the church acts as a stark contrast against the static Renaissance facades of the neighboring buildings. In true baroque fashion, the exterior uses a combination of convex and concave forms to create a dynamic effect, and the semicircular portico draws visitors inside, welcoming them into the church (Fig. 6). The oval shape of the plan is evident from the exterior, as the curved walls on either side of the portico act as the curtains of a theater, providing a glimpse of the stage beyond.

Fig. 6: exterior, San Andrea al Quirinale

The drama of the church overwhelms the visitor upon entrance, as the majestically ornate high altar comes into view immediately. The plan recalls that of Borromini’s San Carlo but the oval shape is kept pure (Fig. 7). Bernini did not distort any of the geometry of the plan and the oval is clear from the lower level of the church. Furthermore, unlike at San Carlo where the altar is placed at the long axis of the oval, the high altar at San Andrea is placed on the short axis of the oval, necessitating that one walk around the church to fully experience and understand the space—an important aspect of baroque design. The church is tiny by the standards of the day, but its theatricality makes it appear grand. Bernini used a rich palate of materials and colors on the interior to achieve a greater sense of complexity and drama in the space. Pink colored marble inundates the church, creating an opulent vision of splendor (Fig. 8). Enormous square pilasters are placed evenly around the church, drawing the eye toward the high altar.

Fig. 7: plan, San Andrea al Quirinale

Fig. 8: interior, San Andrea al Quirinale

Bernini’s vision of theatricality reaches its climax in the high altar, where he uses painting, sculpture, lighting, and architecture to create an effect of vertical ascension. Depicted in a painting over the altar is the martyrdom of St. Andrew, the namesake of the church. St. Andrew looks up, directing the eye toward Bernini’s masterful sculpture of the cloud born spirit of St. Andrew, ascending into heaven. A hidden window above the altar illuminates the statue, giving life to the sculpted rays of light bursting out from the clouds (Fig. 9). The eye continues upward, past the vibrant sculptures that ring the entablature, along the ribs of the elliptical dome symbolizing rays of sunlight, and finally to the lantern and the image of a dove surrounded by the golden light of heaven (Fig. 10). This incredible sequence from the earthly to the celestial realm is a powerful dramatic effect, recalling Bernini’s vision of architecture as a staging of a religious experience.

Fig. 9: altar, San Andrea al Quirinale

Fig. 10: dome, San Andrea al Quirinale

Bernini’s incredible theatricality in San Andrea would have overwhelmed the visitor with its majesty and drama. Completed in 1672, the church was Bernini’s last major commission and the only work he ever considered perfect. Bernini refused payment for the church, and visited the church every day until he died. Reacting to his magnificent work, Bernini told his son, “I feel a special satisfaction at the bottom of my heart for this one work of architecture. I often come here as a relief from my duties to console myself with my work.”[2]

Conclusion
Borromini’s San Carlo alle Quattro Fonante and Bernini’s San Andrea al Quirinale offer two very different visions of what architecture meant during the Baroque age in the hands of two very different architects. Both men were deeply religious, but expressed their devotion through different architectural styles. While Bernini sought to display the grandeur of god through drama and emotion, Borromini aimed to venerate God through geometry that emphasized the rationality of nature. Borromini was a master of manipulating classical elements and pure geometries to create a dynamic, flowing space. He never used any color in his church design and any sculpture or lighting effects were used to emphasize, not overwhelm, the architecture. The incredible sculptural expression that Borromini achieved in the walls of San Carlo is the epitome of the Baroque sense of movement that would come to influence future architectural design throughout the world. Bernini, on the other hand, tended to use simple forms and more pure, yet dynamic, geometries. To achieve the dramatic and theatrical effect he strived for, he fused painting, sculpture, and architecture to elicit a deeply emotional response from the visitor. Bernini and Borromini were crucial to the development of the Rome we know today, and their rivalry produced some of the greatest artistic works of the 17th century. Perfectly illustrating the incredible though drastically different genius of the two architects, Morrissey states, “Bernini astounded by letting his talent spring from his heart; Borromini by arranging and controlling the wonders of the infinite. Bernini, at heart, was a sculptor who manipulated space. Borromini was an architect who sculpted it.”[3]

[1] Morrissey, 92
[2] Morrissey, 245
[3] Morrissey, 179

Works Cited
Blunt, Anthony. Borromini. London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1979.

Conners, Joseph. “ Bernini’s S. Andrea al Quirinale: Payments and Planning,” JSAH, XLI: 1, March 1982.

Kostof, Spiro. A History of Architecture, Second Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Morrissey, Jake. The Genius in the Design: Bernini, Borromini, and the Rivalry that Transformed Rome. New York: HarperCollins, 2005.

Trachtenberg, Marvin, and Isabelle Hyman. Architecture, from Prehistory to Postmodernity, Second Edition. New York: H.N. Abrams, 2002.

Varriano, John. Italian Baroque and Rococo Architecture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.

The Legacy of the Obelisks of Rome

Nina Tan
Honors Program in Rome - Summer 2008

I. Introduction
The thirteen obelisks of Rome can be found in front of some of the city’s most important buildings, such as the Pantheon and St. Peter’s in the Vatican. These ostensibly simple stone monuments link two of the greatest ancient civilizations in history to the legacies of the papacy in Rome. The use of the obelisk as a tool of propaganda by prominent historical leaders spans three important historical eras: the rule of the Egyptians, the peak of the Roman Empire, and the transformation of Rome into the center of Christianity. Although the general public probably did not understand the carved hieroglyphs and inscriptions, the strategic placement of these spoils of war around the city of Rome was not without political and social agenda. The buried history of the obelisk makes it all the more effective as a symbol of worship, conquest, and power simultaneously, especially in its most recent use as papal propaganda. Looking more closely at these monuments, we gain a more thorough understanding of the resurrection of power the great leaders of the past utilized within the chapters of Roman history.


II. Historical function in Egypt
The ancient Egyptians created obelisks as early as 2400 BC, often erecting them in pairs in front of funerary monuments or temples dedicated to different pagan gods. The obelisk can be seen as a petrified ray of sunshine that widens as it reaches out from the sky and towards the earth. In this way, it was considered a vessel for communication between the gods, the heavens, and the mortal world. As a physical representation of the sun, it was common to find obelisks in front of temples dedicated to the sun god Ra. The importance of the sun as the source of light and warmth made Ra one of the most prominent Egyptian gods, and he was seen as the ruler of the pantheon of Egyptian gods. Many of the obelisks in Rome were taken from the ancient Egyptian capital city of Heliopolis, known as the city of the sun, where the cult of Ra was based. Even though the hieroglyphs of an obelisk may have glorified another god, the fact that the obelisk was built to mimic the shape of a ray of sunlight pays tribute to the omnipresence of Ra in ancient Egypt.


The original hieroglyphs on some of the monuments also tell the story of the particular obelisk. Some of the columns of hieroglyphs on the obelisk that now stands in Piazza del Popolo translate to this message, written by the Pharaoh Seti I: “Rā, I give to thee all lands and foreign countries with rest of heart, O king of the north and south…” This passage exemplifies the use of obelisks in ancient Egypt as gifts to the gods by way of “dedication” of conquests. Found on the same obelisk in Piazza del Popolo are columns of hieroglyphs added by pharaoh Rameses II that exalt the reign of his father and compare him to various gods. These messages from the pharaohs to the gods decorated the sides of their obelisks that stretched towards the heavens to deliver their message. Usually commissioned by pharaohs to commemorate their accomplishments or those of the pharaohs before them, the obelisks stood as lasting monuments to celebrate the rule of these leaders. When the Roman emperor Augustus conquered Egypt in 30 B.C, he was well aware of the importance in function of the obelisk in the Egyptian civilization. As both a monument of gratitude for the gods and a physical representation of the divine power of Egypt’s pharaohs, the history of the obelisk only made it all the more valuable as a sign of the glory of his conquest.


III. Structure and Transport
An obelisk is a vertically erect, four sided structure that sits on a base and tapers to a pyramidal top. Parts of the Egyptian obelisks would have been plated in gold, most likely the pyramidal top that reached into the heavens. Spanning a variety of lengths, the shortest found in Rome today measures approximately 6 meters, and is found outside the Church of Santa Maria Sopra Minerva. The tallest is about 33 meters high and stands in front of the Church of San Giovanni in Laterano. The bronze cross and pontificate’s coat of arms that caps the obelisks in Rome are not part of the original Egyptian structure, but were added by the Popes who re-erected the monuments during the Counter Reformation. The vertical rows of hieroglyphs on an obelisk span the length of the sides they are carved into, and document and praise a pharaoh’s bravery in a victorious battle or some other fortuitous event that had occurred for the leader or the empire. The hieroglyphs also expressed thanks to various pagan gods for the protection and goodwill they provided for the Egyptian people. However, some of the hieroglyphs found on the obelisks today are “fake,” ordered by the emperors of Rome. Roman workers carved nonsensical messages into the obelisks without proper knowledge of the complex symbols, some of which can still be seen today.
Typical Egyptian obelisks were carved from a single block of red granite. The stonemasonry of the Egyptians, as seen in any of their historical monuments like the pyramids, was undoubtedly a clever use of their resources and ancient tools. It has been hypothesized that the Egyptians must have cleverly employed the use of sand when creating the obelisks. Through the use of the sturdy properties of rocks, sand was used to carve rock with rock.


Keeping in mind the limited methods and technology available at the time of their creation, the construction of an obelisk from a single block of granite exemplifies a feat in engineering that further mystifies the symbolism of the monument. One idea is that the Egyptians carved the obelisk out of the quarry horizontally, first releasing three sides and then carving the last side to leave a narrow connecting strip. Wooden beams were then placed under the obelisk and the connecting strip was carved out so that the weight of the monolith lay on the beams. The obelisk was then pulled out of the quarry using a series of levers and transported down the Nile on barges.


Moving the obelisk is an even greater accomplishment than its creation. The ancient Romans under the rule of Augustus moved the first obelisks from Egypt, most likely down the Nile and across the Mediterranean Sea to its final location in Rome. To move these stone monuments that often weighed a few hundred tons was never considered impossible. The Romans engineered new ships specifically for the transportation of the obelisks. These ships moved with the work of multiple levels of rowers and were so admired that they were often put on display for the Roman citizens. One of the ships that the Emperor Caligula built to transport an obelisk to Rome in 37 A.D weighed about 1,550 tons. Once on land, it took hundreds of workers months to pull the obelisk to its next location. The sheer effort required in engineering and carrying out a method of transporting obelisks is yet another testament to the greatness of the Roman Empire.


IV. Symbolism in ancient Rome
The hieroglyphs on the obelisk, and even the obelisk itself, were known by both the literate and illiterate of Rome as symbols of Egypt. Thus, because of their mere presence in the city of Rome, the obelisk became a spectacle. Not only did they serve a decorative purpose, but also stood as a reminder to the people of Rome, and even visitors to Rome, of the defeat of the Egyptians led by Augustus.

Now known as one of Rome’s most revered emperors, Augustus conquered Egypt in 30 B.C after defeating Caesar and Cleopatra in Alexandria. Although Egypt’s reign had been in decline, the conquest of such an important civilization completed Rome’s conquest of the Mediterranean basin. Such a feat deserved not only widespread recognition but also an assured remembrance in history, which was commonly achieved through the possession of spoils. Emperor Augustus understood the importance of the obelisk in Egypt as a symbol of association between the gods and the pharaohs. He included the monuments in his spoils, but with the first two obelisks he brought to Rome in 10 B.C the symbolism of the monument changed with respect to its new location. While the Egyptians placed the obelisks outside temples and funerary monuments, Augustus had a different purpose in mind. One of the obelisks was placed in Circus Maximus, an ancient Roman stadium used for chariot races and gladiator fights that were guaranteed to attract a large and diverse crowd of people. The other was placed in the Field of Mars as the gnomon (pointer) of a sundial. The placement of this obelisk in particular was especially symbolic in that Augustus oriented it so that on his birthday its shadow would fall upon the Ara Pacis, the altar that commemorated the peace that Augustus brought to the empire after his conquests in 13 B.C. Additional obelisks were placed outside pagan temples in Rome as a symbolic gift to the gods from the emperor.
The mere presence of the obelisks in Rome was not their only testament to Augustus’ power. Augustus himself ordered Latin inscriptions to be carved into the base of the obelisks. For example, the obelisk that stood in the Field of Mars had an inscription that dedicated the obelisk to Rome’s defeat of Egypt and to the sun God as a gift from Augustus, “son of the divine Julius Caesar.” In creating a connection between himself and the great pharaohs of Egypt, his own power also increased in status.


Augustus had started a trend referred to by some academics as “megalithomania,” and emperors after him both built and erected obelisks around the city. Their intentions sometimes paralleled those of Augustus. In 357 A.D, Constantius relocated an obelisk from the temple of the Sun at Heliopolis to the Circus Maximus in Rome as a commemoration of the peace he brought to the Empire. Some emperors employed the obelisks in their original Egyptian use as funerary monuments. Between 117 and 138 A.D, Hadrian ordered an obelisk to be carved and brought over from Egypt to stand in front of the funerary temple he built for his lover Antinous. Inscriptions on the obelisk deified Antinous and compared him to the Egyptian gods, stating that his soul was like that of the “truth speaker” Ra

V. Symbolism in Christian Rome
Just as there were multiple emperors who utilized the importance of the obelisk in history to promote themselves and the Roman Empire, there were a total of six popes who physically and symbolically resurrected the obelisks between the 16th and 18th centuries. The obelisks had been forgotten after the decline of the Roman Empire and were usually found in pieces scattered throughout the city.


If a pope decided to re-erect an obelisk, he would do so with the noble intent of celebrating the triumph of Christianity over paganism. These symbols of power once stood in front of pagan temples but were now moved in front of churches. In their resurrection, obelisks not only glorified Christianity, but also stood as a symbol of the legacy of the current pontificate as a continuation of the greatness of the emperors and their Empire. The process of fixing these obelisks usually included and exorcism and purification process completed by the addition of the bronze cross and pontificate’s coat of arms on the pyramidal top. Rather than destroy the remaining hieroglyphs on the obelisks they were preserved, but the symbol of the cross that crowned the obelisk was a symbol of the defeat of paganism and the rise of Christianity. New inscriptions were also be carved into the base of the obelisk often to link the pope to the emperor who had brought it from Egypt, again harkening back to the glory of the Roman Empire. For example, Pope Pius VI, who re-erected 3 obelisks during his pontificate between 1775 and 1799, attempted to point out the similarities between his rule and the prosperity of the Roman Empire under Augustus with the following inscription found on one obelisk base: “[Augustus] after bringing Egypt under the power of the Roman people, dedicated the obelisk to the sun…[Pius] cleaned the obelisk of dirt and damage, carefully completed the missing parts, and gave it back to the city and the sky.” Thus, the obelisk was transformed not only into a reminder of what the city once was but also brought attention to the generosity and auspicious rule of the Pope.

Obelisks were also incorporated into statues and fountains around the city, such as the obelisk erected by Pope Innocent X in 1651 in Bernini’s Fountain of the Four Rivers in Piazza Navona. However, the most important use of the obelisks is the role they played in the urban planning efforts of Pope Sixtus V in the late 16th century. Pope Sixtus V was head of the Church from 1585-1590, during the conclusion of the Counter Reformation. As the rising center of Christianity in the world at the time, Pope Sixtus’ vision was to create a city accessible for the many pilgrims that would visit Rome. Sixtus restored and relocated obelisks at three major churches, St. Peter’s, Santa Maria Maggiore, and St. John Lateran, and placed a fourth obelisk at Piazza del Popolo, the city’s Northern entrance. These obelisks sat at the ends of major roads that connected the sites, and served to orient pilgrims so they would be able to make their way from one obelisk to the next.

The strategic placement of these obelisks also highlighted the accomplishments of Sixtus during his pontificate. At St. Peter’s, Sixtus was building both a papal palace and Michelangelo’s dome. His family’s villa and his own personal burial chapel were at Santa Maria Maggiore, and he had built a new portico and pontifical palace at St. John Lateran. When pilgrims visited Rome, they would follow the path laid out by the obelisks, and end up at each site Sixtus had a hand in restoring or creating. With his efforts, Christianity spread and his own pontificate flourished.


VI. Conclusion
It is no coincidence that with the restoration of these ancient monuments, a Pope’s legacy would be carved in stone next to the memory of the emperors of the ancient Roman Empire. The power of the obelisk is unique in its extensive historical use as propaganda, dating all the way back to the ancient Egyptians and maintaining its symbolism of power throughout its subtle transformations. The obelisks that remain today have been interwoven into the city’s ancient and modern infrastructure. They are found in front of important churches and in the middle of famous Piazzas, strategically placed there by their most recent caretakers, the popes. Over thousands of years, the physical structure of the obelisk has hardly been altered, save for damaged hieroglyphs and the addition of symbols of the papacy and Christianity. Yet in its initial move to ancient Rome and its resurrection during the 16th-18th centuries, the obelisk has found new meaning that was built upon historical greatness. From the feats of engineering required to create and transport these stone pillars, both during the Roman and over a thousand years later during the Counter Reformation, to the integral use of the monuments in organizing Rome into the center of Christianity, the 13 remaining obelisks of Rome contain the lasting marks of two of the greatest civilizations in history. Ultimately, they stand as a symbol of the dominance of Christianity in the world today.

VII. Author’s closing notes
What I found most interesting about obelisks is how little they changed over thousands of years yet they embody such extensive historical importance. The obelisk is the prime example of the ostensibly subliminal symbols of power placed around the city of Rome. By using inscriptions to describe the parallels between their own lives and the lives of emperors and gods, the leaders of Rome used the religious connotations of the obelisk to assert their own power. Obelisks are simple, so simple in their composition, yet serve as reminders of the ancient Roman Empire and its emperors, the accomplishments of the popes, the rebuilding of Christianity’s reputation and the rule of the great pharaohs of Egypt. They have been the ultimate trophy for many, and this layered history makes them so interesting to study.

Works Cited
Budge, E. A. Cleopatra's Needles and Other Egyptian Obelisks. Grand Rapids: Kessinger, LLC, 2003.

Collins, Jeffrey. “Obelisk designs by Giovanni Stern.” The Bvrlington Magazine 142 (2000): 90-100.

Collins, Jeffrey. Papacy and Politics in Eighteenth Century Rome. New York: Cambridge UP, 2004. 193-218.

Grafton, Anthony. “Obelisks and Empires of the Mind.” The American Scholar 71.1 (2002): 123-127.

Howard, Philip. "War Memorial Obelisks Tell an Old Roman Story." Times Online. 30 Mar. 2008. 9 July 2008 .
Jokilehto, Jukka. History of Architectural Conservation. 1st ed. New York: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2002. 36-38.

Kirk, Terry. "Framing St. Peter's: Urban Planning in Fascist Rome." Art Bulletin 88 (2006): 756-776. 27 June 2008 Framing St. Peter's: Urban Planning in Fascist Rome.>.

Kleiner, Diana E. Cleopatra and Rome. Boston: Harvard UP, 2005. 163-165.
Mysteries of the Nile. 1 Nov. 2000. NOVA PBS. 9 July 2008 .

Paoletti, John T., and Gary M. Radke. Art in Renaissance Italy. 3rd ed. New York: Prentice Hall, 2005. 539-542.

Piperno, Roberto. “Obelisks of Rome.” Rome: In the Footsteps of an XVIIIth Century Traveler. 1999-2005. <>

Heavenly Architecture: The History, Design, and Propaganda of Piazza San Pietro

Jeff Smith
Honors Program in Rome - Summer 2008

Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini (1598-1680) is regarded as one of the best baroque artists in history. Although involved with many famous projects, this sculptor and architect from Naples is forever immortalized for his design and creation of Piazza San Pietro (St. Peter’s Square) -the Vatican City piazza that invites pilgrims and tourists alike to behold the splendor of Basilica di San Pietro (Basilica of St. Peter) before entering “the greatest of all churches in Christendom” (Bannister).
This piazza is a masterful piece of propaganda of the Roman-Catholic Church which allows both the pilgrim and visitor to view Catholicism as an intricate, powerful, and awe-inspiring entity as they enter into the heavenly glow of Piazza St. Pietro.

Both the glowing piazza and the massive basilica of Vatican City were named after St. Peter, the leader of the twelve apostles of Jesus and the first pope of the Catholic Church. Many art historians believe that the body of St. Peter still rests under the basilica which bears his name. St. Peter’s Basilica was commissioned by Emperor Constantine in 319 AD during the papacy of Sylvester I. Due to years of neglect and damage suffered during the sack of Rome in the 15th century, Pope Julius II and a number of his successors directed the nearly complete restructure of the Basilica. A legendary staff of architects, including Raphael, Michelangelo, Bramante, and Maderno, were involved in the rebuilding. The current dome of the Basilica was completed in 1590, and it stands today as the fundamental symbol of the Roman-Catholic Church and all of Christianity. After completion of the magnificent Basilica, Pope Alexander VII decided almost immediately upon his papal election in 1656 that the approach to St. Peter’s needed to be rebuilt as well. He commissioned Bernini, who had worked on other architectural projects for the church, including St. Peter’s baldachin, to be the lead architect in designing the piazza which was to welcome tens of millions of pilgrims to one of the holiest sites in all of Catholicism.

Bernini worked on the piazza from 1656 until its completion in 1667. Papal commissions were nothing new to Bernini. Before the papacy of Alexander VII, he was a favorite of Pope Urban VIII, and worked near or at St. Peter’s for fifty-four years of his life. After obtaining the commission from Alexander VII to design the piazza, Bernini considered many blueprints, including a trapezoidal shaped entrance. However, with much input from cardinals and other church officials, he settled on a primarily elliptical-shaped piazza, a “sub-piazza” known as Piazza Obliqua (unless otherwise noted, I will use “piazza” synonymously with “Piazza San Pietro”). The long axis of the ellipse spans 350 meters and the short axis is roughly 240 meters; an impressive size given the central location of St. Peter’s relative to Rome and Vatican City. In addition to the dominant elliptical portion of Piazza San Pietro, Bernini incorporated a trapezoidal shape (named Piazza Retta) into the piazza near the entrance to the Basilica. Bernini enclosed the Piazza San Pietro with radially aligned travertine Doric columns utilized to accentuate the vertical height of the piazza’s enclosure. In an unconventional architectural move, Bernini also made use of ionic entablature on top of the Doric columns, a design which added structural strength to the colonnades. A total of 284 columns, thirty-nine feet in height and four rows deep, surround the elliptical and trapezoidal portions of the piazza. The area between the columns is wide enough for a carriage (or car) to pass through; allowing the Pope and other church officials to quickly traverse the large piazza while bypassing crowds. Bernini placed a heightened portion of the portico in the middle of the colonnade arms, which breaks up some of the repetitiveness of the nearly three hundred columns, but still allows the eye to transition smoothly around the piazza. A fifteen foot high statue of a saint or a martyr of the Catholic Church tops each of the 96 colonnades. The surface of the piazza was initially paved with cobblestones, but the current cobblestones are not the originals due to the wear on the piazza’s surface from hundreds of thousands of pilgrims and visitors who fill the area each year. Today, radiating lines of whitish travertine intertwine the new dark cobblestones.

At each of the geometric focal points of the elliptical portion of the piazza, there are two identical fountains composed of white marble that provide a striking contrast to the dark cobblestones paving the piazza. The original fountain was designed by Carlo Maderno (found on the southern side of the piazza) and the second fountain was added by Bernini to give symmetry to the piazza; a decision which is consistent with Renaissance-style design. Between the two fountains, a 25.5 meter obelisk adorned by a cross sits atop small bronze lions and a pedestal, raising the obelisk to a height of 41 meters above the ground. The cross that rests atop the obelisk symbolizes the relic of the “true cross” on which Jesus Christ was crucified on.

During the Middle Ages and before the cross sat upon the apex of the obelisk, a small sphere rested upon the pinnacle of the obelisk. It was said that this ball held the ashes of Julius Caesar; symbolically linking the Catholic Church to the days when the Roman Empire was at the height of its power. This Egyptian obelisk was built in the 13th century BC and is made of red granite. It was moved to Rome in 37 AD by the Emperor Caligula. It is one of only 28 known remaining intact obelisks in the world from ancient Egypt, and was moved by Pope Sixtus V to its current location in 1586. The task of moving the prodigious and ancient obelisk intimidated many of the greatest minds of the day and was finally delegated to Dominco Fotana, who supposedly had horses ready to escape the wrath of Sixtus V in case the obelisk toppled during the move. Luckily, Fontana’s engineering feat was successful, and the obelisk which serves to represent light and the power of the Catholic Church still stands slender and triumphant against the backdrop of St. Peter’s Basilica.

Because the obelisk had been moved to the front of St. Peter’s Basilica before work on the piazza began, Bernini was forced to incorporate the already existing obelisk into his design; a task that was not new to him. In his design of the Fountain of Four Rivers in Piazza Navona in 1651, Bernini also had to work around an existing obelisk. It was fitting that Pope Alexander VII (a lover of history and the arts, and one of the more worldly individuals to hold the papacy) was the Pope to commission the piazza which would display the historic obelisk. Pope Alexander VII wanted an entrance to the basilica that would convey the power and glory of the Catholic Church while filling the viewer with an overpowering sense of awe. During the design and construction of the piazza, the baroque style which incorporates movement, awe, and balance into architecture and art was at its height of popularity in Rome. In his design, Bernini was forced to deal with many architectural restrictions due to existing buildings and structures, many of which housed church officials who did not want their homes destroyed.

Still, these complications could not prevent Bernini from utilizing the baroque style as propaganda to meet the Church’s wishesof an entrance which would make pilgrims and visitors feel a sense of holy revelation while being overwhelmed by the massive, yet ornate structures of the Catholic Church. However, Bernini did not complete his finalized design in its entirety.
The “third arm” of the piazza which would guide pilgrims and visitors into its interior was never completed. Nevertheless, the completed piazza and basilica signify the power and importance of the Catholic faith while also serving to make visitors feel welcome in the wake of their feelings of awe.

This feeling of amazement in the pilgrim was dramatically increased by Bernini’s design of the approach to the piazza. Bernini specifically constructed the path to the basilica and piazza to wind through the narrow streets of Rome, preventing the pilgrims from being able to see the piazza or basilica until they were nearly upon them. This design was characteristic of the baroque “surprise.” The brilliant white travertine marble colonnades of the piazza provide a divine glow, giving the pilgrims and visitors the impression that they are transitioning from dark, winding streets of Rome into the light of Catholicism. In the words of Bernini, the piazza allows pilgrims to be received into “the motherly arms of the church.” These propaganda techniques were intended to show the strength and power of the Catholic Church.

In addition to linking the church to strength and power, Alexander VII, a son of the prominent Chigi family, wanted to link his family to the magnificent attributes of the piazza. He did so by having his name inscribed numerous times throughout the two porticos, as well as having his family’s coat of arms of mountains and oaks decorate both the base of the obelisk and doors within the portico. Alexander VII’s goals were clear: as patron of these architectural masterpieces, he wanted to heighten the glory and strength of the Catholic Church, but also assure that his family would gain both fame and power. Alexander VII did not to be forgotten in the annals of history, and his tomb, designed by Bernini, which rests inside the basilica is further testament to his goal of surviving posthumously through the art and architecture he commissioned.

The current approach to St. Peter’s and the masterful propaganda of the Catholic Church has been changed since its original construction. Bernini initially designed the approach to prevent pilgrims from seeing the piazza until they were nearly on top of it. He mapped an approach to the piazza that involved pilgrims and visitors crossing the Tiber River over Ponte Sant’Angelo near Castel Sant’Angelo. Castel Sant’Angelo was initially constructed by Emperor Hadrian (76AD-138AD) as a mausoleum for his family. It was converted into a military fortress in 401 AD, and used by the papacy as a fortress until 1901, when it was decommissioned from defense purposes. Today, the building stands as a museum. During the crossing of Ponte Sant’Angelo, the pilgrims were able to get their first glimpses of St. Peter’s Basilica; a site that would almost certainly give any weary pilgrim more than enough strength to walk the final steps to the rock of Catholicism. The winding approach to St. Peter’s was destroyed in 1936 by Benito Mussolini. In a politically savvy move, Mussolini had an avenue built that would lead directly to the Basilica. This linked his dictatorship with the power of the Catholic Church, as well as served as propaganda to give his leadership divine legitimacy.

Changes and constraints were forced upon Bernini both during and after his lifetime. Bernini was limited in his design by both restrictions of religious officials and the lay of the land, and had to deal with many logistical and structural problems. Nevertheless, he put much thought into the symbolic nature of the piazza’s design. The piazza had to encompass a large amount of area to allow the maximum number of pilgrims to attend masses presided over by the Pontiff. Also, the Doric columns which surround the both the trapezoidal and elliptical portions of the piazza were erected to be a specific height to allow pilgrims to view the Pope without architectural hindrance. Like many historical masterpieces, art historians have made different arguments regarding the reasoning behind Bernini’s unique design of Piazza San Pietro.
Kiato argues that the construction of the piazza was designed almost solely as an amphitheater “for the performance of God’s worship;” built primarily to pack pilgrims into the piazza for mass. While the ability to hold a prodigious number of individuals was a practical necessity to allow for large mass attendance, the art historian Napier argues that there is deeper meaning behind the symmetrical fountains and welcoming travertine colonnades. In his book, Napier states that the design of the piazza was shaped to mimic a uterus. As Bernini intended to glorify St. Peter’s as “the mother of all churches,” Napier attempts to persuade his audience that Bernini accomplished that task by glorifying the Virgin Mary through his design, and allowing “the womb of the world [to be] inverted on the altar of God.” Napier provides structural evidence for his claim: the two fountains symbolize the uterine arteries which “bring life giving fluid to the womb,” while the third arm of the piazza that was never constructed would have formed two entrances meant to symbolize fallopian tubes. In addition, the overall shape of the piazza with its elliptical and trapezoidal portion does resemble the shape of a uterus. Napier expands his assertion further, arguing that the altar symbolizes the masculine key to the womb with the keys being eternally held by St. Peter, whose body rests under the altar. One aspect of Bernini’s creation is certain: the piazza was designed as a propaganda piece to convey the power, spirituality, and greatness of the church, yet also serves to invite pilgrims to the most well known basilica in the world to gaze upward at the wonder and glory of God.

Piazza San Pietro has survived nearly four and a half centuries, and has influenced the thoughts, actions, and lives of millions of people, whether Catholic or not. Even a person of the 21st century living in a technologically advanced world that Bernini could not have possibly fathomed is left awe-struck by the piazza’s magnificence. With radiating white travertine marble columns enclosing the colossal piazza adorned by fifteen foot high legends of Catholicism, it is difficult to imagine a pope, or any other individual for that matter, advocating any major changes to Bernini’s baroque masterpiece. The cross that adorns the ancient, slender obelisk provides a beacon of light to those feeling the call of the Catholic Church. This piazza will continue to be an experience of a lifetime for countless more pilgrims through the coming centuries.

In writing and researching this paper about Piazza San Pietro, there were two topics that I kept delving deeper into: Bernini and the ancient Roman Obelisk. I was taken with Bernini before I had the privilege of seeing his works firsthand in Rome, but after seeing the statues that he designed while in his teens, I was truly amazed at this baroque sculptor who centered his life on artistic perfection. The thought, time, and dedication that he put into each of his masterpieces deserve the kudos of the millions of people who have the privilege of seeing his works.

The 440-ton obelisk between the two fountains of St. Peter’s also captured my attention, as it likewise did for many Roman emperors and popes. Reading about the specially constructed boats used to transport the obelisk to Rome in the first century as well as the stories involving the ceremonies during its move to its present location under Pope Sixtus V will amaze almost anyone. I also thought it very interesting that the pagan-constructed obelisk had held the ashes of the legendary pagan Roman leader Julius Caesar, and yet remains an icon of the holiest site of the monotheistic Catholic Church. Although the obelisk and Bernini captured my curiosity, it would be easy to pick almost any portion of Piazza San Pietro and be struck by its magnificence. It is a testament to Bernini’s artistic skill that his work invokes such feelings of awe.

Bibliography
Baumgarten, Paul M. “Basilica of St. Peter.” New Advent. 23 Apr. 2008.

Bonechi, Casa E. The Golden Book of Rome and the Vatican. Trans. Erika Pauli. Italy: Centro Stampa Editoriale Bonechi, 2000.

Campbell, Ian. “The New St. Peter's; Basilica or Temple?” Oxford Art Journal. 1981. 3-8.

Driggers, Jenne. “Piazza San Pietro: the Rhyme and Reason Behind Great Art.” 2006. Art History Presentation Archive. June-July 2008 .

Duptay, Abbe. “Description of St. Peter’s Church, at Rome.” Vol. 4, Iss. 3; pg. 182

Mattson, Julia. “Bernini’s Work at St. Peter’s.” 2004. Art History Presentation Archive. June-July 2008 .

Marder, Tod A. Bernini's Scala Regia at the Vatican Palace. Cambridge University Press. 1997.

Napier, David A. "Bernini's Anthropology: A 'Key' to Piazza San Pietro." RES. Autumn 1998.

Nguyen, Minh-An. “St. Peter’s Piazza.” 2005. Art History Presentation Archive. June-July 2008

Scotti, R. A. Basilica: The Splendor and the Scandal: Building St. Peters. Kindle Publishing.

Wittkower, Rudolf. Art and architecture in Italy, 1600 to 1750. Penguin Books. 1958.