Notes on Italian medals. XIII: Some Florentine medals/ by G.F. Hill

8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. XIII: Some Florentine medals/ by G.F. Hill

1/6


2/6

Notes on Italian MedalsI would point out, merely as a suggestion to befollowed up, that the remains of the obverse in-scription seem to indicate some follower ofCharles VIII named " Guy ", and that the lettersVR would also not be inconsistent with the nameof Guy d'Aurillot. This man was notary andsecretaryof the king, and was with him at Amboiseon 24th January, 1494, and 8th March, 1496 ; butwhether he went to Italy I do not know.If this medal certainly represents one of theFrenchmen, there can be no doubt that theFrenchmen'sportraits and those with the Hopereverse were made in the sameworkshop; whetherthat was Niccolb Fiorentino's is another question.Another medal [PLATE I, C] which was madeeither in Florence or in Rome, at the time (about1485-90) when Florentine influence was at itsstrongest there, representsthe FerraresehistorianPeregrinoPrisciano.6 Unfortunatelythe only twospecimens known to me (Paris and London) arelate and indifferentcasts ; of the two, the Londonspecimen is slightly the better,although an alienreverse(the Pegasusof Cellini's Bembo medal)wasadded when the cast was made, some time in thelate I6th century. The inscriptionof the obverseshouldapparentlybe expandedinto PEREGR(ino)PRISCIA(no)FERRA(riensi)RO(mano)EQVI(ti)COM(iti)Q(ue). Presumably Prisciano was aCount Palatine; and the medal may have beenmade on some visit to Rome when he receivedthis dignity, or at Florence on his way through.Dr. Bode has stated a theory that Niccol6Fiorentino visited Rome about 1485 and theremodelled the portraits of a number of people,including that of the Englishman John Kendal.Assuming this theory to be correct,it is difficulttosay of the portrait of Prisciano, in the compara-tively poorreproductionsof it which havesurvived,whether it is worthy to rank with the undoubtedcreationsof Niccol6 Fiorentino ; and it is perhapsbest to leave it for the present with the label"Florentine School".One of the finest productionsof that school is aunique portraitin lead of the humanistSebastianoSalvini, in thepossessionof the SocietaiColombariaat Florence, reproduced on a reduced scale inPLATEII, G. As the descriptionand illustrationof this striking medal, which by the courtesy of theSociety I have been privileged to give in its" Proceedings "7 are not likely to meet the eye ofmany readers of TheBurlington Magazine, I may beallowed to repeat here that the readings of Armand5and Poggi9 should be amended to "Magister

Sebastianus Salvinus qui semper sectatus esteam que circ . . at ambitum celi sola ", andthat the object of Salvini's pursuitwas Wisdom(Ecclesiasticus xxiv, 8). The portrait seems tome not to be the work of any known medallist,butrather of some good sculptor of 1480-1500 whowas trying his hand at a portrait-plaqueon a smallscale.The Venetian Gioacchino della Torre, theGeneral of the Dominicans, who in 1498sentencedSavonarola,is representedon a fine medal in theBritish Museum [PLATE I, DJ, which has beenattributedby Bode to Niccol6 Fiorentino. Every-one will, at any rate,admit its Florentineorigin. Ithas all the strength and all the weakness of theFlorentine work of the end of the i5th century;the bust is fine and characteristic, the reversedesign clumsy and ineffective. Armand'o hasfallen into a slight confusion in cataloguingthis specimen and a variety which was in hisown collection.' He describes the Londonspecimen as bearing the date 1498, whereas it isundated. But his own specimen, which has as itsreverse a dagger, has the date incised on thetruncation of the bust. What, further, he hasfailed to notice is that his own specimen is a verybad and late after-cast,much tooled, and entirelyvalueless. The form of the "8" in thedate-which was doubtless incised by the manwho madethe cast as the yearwhenthe Dominicanvisited Florence-is a form which is not found inthe 15th century.'2 The daggeron the reverse isa grotesquepiece of bungling,and the whole pieceshould be excluded from any critical list of Italianmedals.Yet another medal which will have to be con-sidered by the critic who essays to describe thework of Niccol6 Fiorentino is one of 1493,whichI know only from the engraving in the " RicordiStorici di Filippo di Cini Rinuccini ", from whichArmand'has describedit. It representsAlamannoRinuccini at the age of about seventy-four(beingdated 1493),and seems, from the engraving,to begood Florentine work of the time.On the other hand,since a remarkof Armand's,to the effect that the reverse of the medal ofThomas Bakacs [PLATE II, E] is imitated fromthe Fortune whoappearson so many medalsof theFlorentine school, might raise expectations ofsomething in the Florentine style, it should besaid that it is pnly in subject, and not in style,that there is any imitation. The medal hasnothing Florentine in it, and was probably madein North Italy, or even perhaps north of the Alps.It was cast between 1500 and 1521, for Bakacs isdescribed as cardinal and primate of Hungary.

5P licier,Lettresde CharlesVIII, IV, p. 6; V,p. 28. AnotherGuywho is mentionedin the documentsof the time is GuydeRochefort, Seigneurde l'Abergement,Chancellorof France.6Armand II, 45, 14. The specimen illustrated here measures69.mm.7Atti della Soc. Colomb,, 1909-19Io,8111, 17I, E.9CatalogodelleMedagliedella Soc.Colombaria,p. 87.

10II, p. 71, Nos. 9, 1o.1 I owe a cast of this to the kindness of M. de Foville.12Hill, On the Early UseofArabicNumeralsin Archccologia,LXII, p. 147, note 4.1 III, 171D.132


3/6

i f i

D :D

?~~i~~k :r :

..........

NOTLES tN ITALIAN MEDALS-XIIIPLATE


4/6

IA1

E

IY

F F

H Ht0

vii~t?77-

NOTES ON ITALIAN MEDALS-XIIIPLATE II


5/6

Noteson Italian MedalsGIROLAMO, COUNT OF PANICO, ANDPOMPEO LUDOVISI. BY CAVINOThis medal [PLATE II, F] is a littlemoreinterest-ing than the majorityof the works of GiovannidalCavino,whose portraitsof his contemporarieshaveusually little to recommend them beyond the factthat they are by the same hand as the best-knownseriesof forgeriesof Roman coins. On the obversearethe busts jugateto left of the PaduanGirolamo,Count of Panico, bearded, in plain robe, and theBolognese Pompeo di Ludovico Ludovisi, alsobearded,in embroidered dress. The inscriptionis HIERONIMVS PANICVS"PAT"POMPEIVSLODOVISIVS"BON ? and on the reverse is theinscription ET NOS ET TVA SIGNA PIVSTVTARE COLENTES.14The type is an elaborateheraldic device; the difficultyof finding Englishterms for the peculiaritiesof Italianheraldrymustbe my excuse if the following descriptionsoundsamateurish. Two shields of arms, one above theother. The lower: three bends enhanced; on achief, S P Q R (for Ludovisi), impaling: a lionrampantchecquy, having a rose in his ear (forPanico); surmounted by two helms, having forcrests the dexter a camel, bridled, the sinister alion rampant checquy. The upper: quarterly:I, a cross; 2 and 3, barry of four; 4, a lionrampant; on a chief an eagle displayed; ona superior chief the papal tiara surmountingtwo keys in saltire. Surmounting the shielda cardinal's hat over a cross patt6e (for Pio diCarpi).The piece has a granitura or border of dots onboth sides, is 39'5mm. in diameter,and, like mostof Cavino's, is struck.The Pompeo Ludovisi in question is the manwho in 1536 received from Paul III the title ofCount for himself and his descendants, and diedin 1565. Count Girolamo da Panico was a poet,and wrote in both Greek and Latin. The Pioreferred to by the inscription (PIVS) and bythe uppershield appearsto be the CardinalRodolfo,who died in 1564. Onhis monument in S. Trinitade' Monti in Rome the arms are representedin asimilar way. The charge on what-because I donot know what else to call it-is described as a"superior chief ", belongs to the Gonfalonier ofthe Church,and should properlybe chargedon apale over the quarters.Such is the reverse type which Armand brieflydescribes as "deux 6cussons ". What relationbetween the two counts and the CardinalRodolfo Pio prompted the execution of this medal1 do not know; perhaps a better equipped genea-logist will follow up the problem.The specimen illustrated is in the BritishMuseum and seems to be the only one that hasbeen published. The same double portrait also

occurs with a reverse (GENIO BENEVO-LENTIAE DVLCIS) which was probably notintended for it, but for the portraitof the Paduanjurisconsult Giov. Antonio Dolce.Before leaving the subject of Cavino, I take theopportunityof noting another addition to the listof his portraitsof his contemporaries. Reglinghasalreadynoticed in his admirable catalogue of theLanna collection (No. 331) that the manner ofCavino is to be discerned in the medal of GabrieleTaddini of Bergamo (or rather Martinengo),anarchitect and engineer, who was born in 148Oand died in 1543..5 The medal is thoroughlycharacteristic of Cavino's arid style. Taddini isdescribed as captain-general of the Emperor'sartillery. On the reverse is a batteryof four guns,with the inscriptionVBI RATIO IBI FORTVNAP(ro)FVGA and the date MCCCCCXXXVIII.This adds another to the four dates (1539, 1540,1554, 1565) already known on Cavino's medals.Regling expands the abbreviation into Perfuga (adeserter)instead of Profuga (put to flight), whichseems to be more correct.GIROLAMO VIDA. BY TEGNIZAThe medal of Girolamo Vida6"illustrated inPLATE II, H,is not rare,but no one seems to havenoticed that it bears an artist'ssignature,until Mr.W. T. Ready discovered one on this specimen inMr.Oppenheimer'scollection. Even this was noteasy to make out, but our combined effortseven-tuallyproducedthereadingTEGNIZA CREMON.That this is correct admits of little doubt. Vidawas himself a Cremonese, and the very unusualname Tegnizzi is igiven by Grasselli17 among theCremoneseartists, although the man he mentionsunder this heading belongs to an earlier periodthan the artist of Vida's medal, being, indeed, asculptor of the 14th century.The medal,which is cast,and measures43 mm.,describes Vida as bishop of Alba, to which see hewas elected in i533; behind his bust are a mitreand the head of a crozier. On the reverse he isseated writing at a table, and is crowned byVirtue (?); on the left are a tall pyramid and acolumn. The inscriptionis NON'STEMMA'SED"VIRTVS.Vida (whose full baptismal name was MarcoGirolamo)was born in 1470, and became bishopof Alba in Piedmont in his sixty-second year, in1533. He died there in I566.Another medal'8 of the same man, with thereverse legend QVOS AMARVNT DII and thetype of Pegasus springing from a rock, is smallerin diameter (38"5mm.); but the bust appears to be

'aArmand I, p. 183, No. 26, not recognizing the fact that thisinscription is a hexameter, begins it with TVTARE.

15Armand II, 176, 15 ; III, 234 d.16Armand II, 161, 16.17Abecedario biogr. dei Pittori , Cremonesi(1827), p. 246.18sArisius, Cremona Liter., II, p. 105 ; Armand II, 161, 17(38 mm.) ; Berlin, Katal. Simon, 382 (37'5mm.) ; Katal. LObbecke,151 (38'5 mm.).137


6/6

Notes on Italian Medalsfrom the same model as theone signed by Tegniza,as will be clear from the illustrationin PLATE1I,Jof the Berlinspecimen.19 If so, two medals are to

be credited to Tegniza or Tegnizzi; he was not agreat artist,certainly,but it is satisfactory to beable to remove two more medals from Armand'ssecond volume to his first.19I1have to thankDr, Menadierfor a cast of this piece.DUCCIO DI BUONINSEGNA AND HIS SCHOOL IN THEMOSTRA DI DUCCIO AT SIENABY GIACOMO DE NICOLA*HE firstrequisite for the study of therevivalof Italian paintingwhich origi-nated in Central Italy at the end ofthe I3th century is the knowledge ofDuccio. In this respect his art isnearly as important as Cimabue's and Giotto's,and even more important than Pietro Cavallini's,since that may be said to have remained withoutsuccession, owing to the calamities which befellRome in the i4th century, mainly due to theremoval of the papal court to Avignon. The threeschools, the Roman,the Sienese andthe Florentine,rose independentlyof each other fromthe commonbasis of Italo-Byzantinepainting,but the certaintyof Cimabue'spresence in Rome and of Duccio'sand Ugolino's in Florence, the probability ofGiotto's presence in Siena,1 and the frequentconjunction of their works in Pisa, Naples, Assisiand elsewhere lead us not to regardeach masterseparately,but rather to unite them in one widerrange of vision.The effects of such relations culminate in theproblem of the MadonnaRucellai of Santa MariaNovella in Florence. We are still disputing,although we have been long debating,the claimsof Cimabue,to whom the picture is assigned bytradition, of Duccio, to whom the majority ofmodern critics attribute it, and of some imitatorof Duccio for whom it is claimed by the smallgroup of students to which I belong. So, con-versely, any serious study of Duccio involves anexamination of the whole problem of the originsof Italian painting.Siena has just offered the opportunities forsuch an investigation. The Sienese determinedto celebrate the secentenaryof the completion ofDuccio's principal work, the Maestt, which isreckoned to have been finished on the 9th of June,1311, by gathering round it in the Museo dell'Operaof the Duomo a full series of other worksby Duccio and his school. Private owners andthe Sienese and Florentine country churches con-tributed to the exhibition. It was impossible forthe series to be completed, for who would dare to

remove the Madonna Rucellai from the chapel inSanta MariaNovella, or Segna's ancona from theCollegiata di Castiglion Fiorentino ? And whowould dareeven to suggest the loan of the fragmentof the Maesta"from the National Gallery? More-over, the experiences of former exhibitions inItaly have quiterightly disinclined the MinistryofPublic Instruction from liberality in grantingpermission for the transference of works of art.The best photographic reproductions, therefore,had to supplythe placeof the numerouspaintingswhich were necessarilyabsent.But the exhibition,even as it stood, hasbroughtto light many paintings hitherto unknown; re-united fragments once parts of a single whole,which had long been scattered in various places;demonstrated that some established attributionsare unfounded,and establishedothers. I proposeto give here an account of the principalresults ofsuch investigations,illustratedwith reproductionsof some pictureswhich have neverbeen publishedbefore.We haveonly one picture attributableto Ducciowith absolute certainty,on the strength of docu-ments and a signature, namely, the Maesth. Asingle painting, therefore, is our sole point ofcomparison for the critical attribution of otherDucciesque works, and this example representsthe master's activity at the period of his maturity,13o8 to 1311. Did he attain to the plenitude ofthe Maesti,through degreesof development,as weshould suppose, or did he spring out of the Italo-Byzantine school, full grown ? This is what wedo not know from the evidence of the only docu-ments which we possess ; and this is why we muststrictly exclude from the corpusof the master'sgenuine works all the paintings stylistically atvariancewith the Maesta.By submitting the Madonna Rucellai to thiscriterion, its authorship is negatively decided, inspite of the well-known document and any otherswhich may yet appear; its derivationfrom Ducciocan be demonstrated,but it cannot be by his hand.If we continue to apply analysis with equalseverity, very few certified works of Duccio willremain. Besides the Maesth, I cannot point tomore than three in the exhibition,which means,inthe whole of the Senese. Two of them are in theGalleria di Siena, and the third in the church of

* Translatedfor the authorfromthe Italian.1 That is to say, the Parigiotto(byabbreviationGiotto)who,with Buonaventuradi Bartolomeo,values the reverse side ofDuccio's Maesti, may be supposedto be none other than thefamous Giotto (see the document in Milanesi, Doc. Sen. ,.p. 178).138

Notes on Italian medals. XIII: Some Florentine medals/ by G.F. Hill

Documents

Transcript of Notes on Italian medals. XIII: Some Florentine medals/ by G.F. Hill