Padre Domenico in the Battle at the White Mountain

In 1620, the Discalced, i.e. unshod, Carmelite father Domenico di Gesù e Maria (1559-1630), armed with a Madonna across his breast and a crucifix in his hand, on the horse of Prince Maximilian I. of Bavaria, rode into the battle between the imperial-ligistic armies and the troups of the Bohemian king at Weisserberg near Prague. Coming from Rome under the orders of Pope Paul V., 61-year-old Padre Domenico had joined Maximilian's army in 1620 being the first ever Army chaplain. Padre Domenico had salvaged the image, a small and clumsily painted "Worship of the Child" (figure1), from the Palace of Strakonice in Bohemia or from mud beneath the palace at Plzen. Heretics have been blamed for gouging out the eyes of all persons depicted, except for the Infant Jesus. The desecration of the image glorified the coincidental salvation by Father Domenico, increased the power of the miraculously salvaged work and enhanced the image of the finder. In the council of war, Father Domenico urged the reluctant commanders to take up the battle, taking care to prophesy their victory in the name of divine Providence.

On the following day, the picture sustained its miraculous powers by emitting bright rays which blinded the army of the elector Frederic V Count palatine. Accordingly, Padre Domenico credited the victory of the Catholic Armies to the image only - although he had simultaneously held up a crucifix in order to conjure up the victory as Emperor Constantine had done in the name of the cross. This was in stark contradiction with the printed glorifications of the victors, Emperors Ferdinand II and Maximilian I, which laud the virtuous princes. [1] On the Emperor's standard, four additional triumphal chariots are grouped around the imperial quadriga behind the Fama, on pedestals beneath a triumphal arch lined with statues: the papal church, drawn by the Evangelists, followed by the Parnassus' chariot of the Sciences and the Arts, on the right Bohemia, Hungary, Austria and Moravia are drawing the fruitful peace, followed by the elephant chariot warranting future security, while an angel with a sword and banner "restitvit rem" - having restored justice - drives out the enemies.

Padre Domenico's find and salvation of the small "Worship of the Child" and how it proved to contribute to the miraculous victory over the enemy were exactly in line with the customary perception of the image of a saint. The seemingly coincidental find and use against the enemy upgraded Padre Domenico's image to the previous function of the icon and its use. The discovery reiterated two essential characteristics of the miraculous image: its inexplicable presence being an expression of its supernatural origin, and the sudden discovery implying some divine providence. Despite its different iconography - with this distinction, the small image stood against the enemy as an invincible protective force like a Byzantine Madonna. The following triumphant entry into the city of Prague was possible because of an image that had just proven its miraculous power and sustained its sanctity. [2] Two years later, Padre Domenico brought the sacred image to Rome, displayed it for all princes and cardinals to worship and achieved its transfer from S. Maria Maggiore to the new church S. Paolo Apostolo of the Carmelite monastery in a solemn procession on May 8th 1622. There, it was awaited and welcomed by pope Gregory XV, while the Te Deum laudamus was being sung. A number of standards, flags and arms were displayed in the procession, which had been captured in the battle at Weisserberg. As late as in 1652, the Rome guide "Ritratto di Roma Moderna" by Filippo de' Rossi reports in detail of the triumphant transfer to the church of the reformed order of the Carmelites in Rome, which had been numerously documented. [3] For papal Rome, which followed a spirited policy with regard to issues such as religion and images with various orders, the victorious image from Bohemia was a welcome support and confirmation. As a matter of course, in 1655, the Jesuit Wilhelm Gumppenberg lists the miraculous image in S. Maria della Vittoria in his "Atlas Marianus", which catalogues and describes 1,200 miraculous Madonna and Child paintings, ranging from Mexico to the Philippines. [4]

The miraculous painting from Bohemia displaced the main altar piece by Gerrit van Honthorst "St. Paul's ascension into the third Heaven" on the provisional altar in the left transept. Accordingly, the unfinished church had to adopt the new name S. Maria della Vittoria, which was recorded in 1625. [5] Padre Domenico had obiously not only brought the victorious image and the looted items from Prague to Rome, but also four large illustrations of the battle at Weisserberg and portraits of Emperors Ferdinand II and Maximilian I. The portraits were stored in the sacristy, while the battle paintings were displayed in the audience hall. [6] The miraculous image from the15th century was destroyed in a fire on 29th June 1833 and was replaced by a coloured engraving. Fifty years later, Luigi Serra of Siena commemorated the triumphant entry of the victorious - and now lost - image in Prague with a painting in the calvarium of the apse.



S. Maria della Vittoria: a Monument against Heretics

The reformed order of the Discalced Carmelites, the Carmelitani scalzi, started in 1607 with the construction of the church and monastery S. Paolo Apostolo outside the centre of Rome, on the former Via Pia opposite the Fountain of Moses, by Domenico Fontana, near the Church of S. Susanna. [7] In his bull "Ad Ecclesiae militantis", Pope Paul V had authorized the order in 1605 to set up monasteries with the assigment of training missionaries for the conversion of unbelievers. Choosing apostle St. Paul as the designated saint was a programmatical move, since the destination had been known early on. As early as 1610, Pietro Martire Felini wrote in his Rome Guide: "Adjoining [S. Susanna], a church is being built with donations, which shall bear the name of S. Paolo [...] in this place the reformed fathers shall be the Carmelites, whose task will be to venture forth into the regions of the unbelievers to make their contribution in converting them." [8]

Padre Domenico brought the image from Prague to that church in Rome, for which it had been destined definitely, from the very beginning, as a monument against heretics. This destination was reinforced by the dedication of the associated monasteries and by the cult of St. Theresa of Avila (1515-1582), the mystic, a significant figure of the Counterreformation in Spain, and founder of the reformed order of the Discalced Carmelites. As early as 1612, during the construction of the church of S. Paolo and before the canonization of Theresa of Avila, she was regularly worshipped. The history of her canonization, which took almost fourty years, lead to her beatification in 1614 and to her canonization in 1622. In the same year, the first Jesuits, i.e. the Spaniards Ignatius of Loyola and Francisco Xavier, were canonized. The year 1622 was particularly well chosen for the arrival of Padre Domenico with the miraculous image and the flags and arms captured in the battle against the heretics. Moreover, in 1622 the Roman national saint, founder of the order of the Oratorians and miracle-worker Filippo Neri was canonized, and in the same year, pope Gregory XV. initiated the Congregatio de propaganda fide to protect and spread the Catholic faith. [9] At the same time, Rome was trying to reinstate the honour and glory of its numerous sacred images, western icons and their imitations in grandiose stagings, so as to reinforce the Faithful and to ward off heretics. The punishment for the desecration of images was remorseless in the Catholic sphere of influence. In 1622, four desecrators were executed in Bologna in the name of God, the Virgin Mary and la patria, the fatherland. [10]

The architect Carlo Maderno was commissioned with the construction of the new church of the Carmelitani scalzi in Rome. His work was completed by 1620, although the façade and decorations were still missing from the church. Padre Domenico was untiring until his death in 1630 in furthering the completion and decoration of the church.11 This included the façade, which was built by Giovanni Battista Soria from 1625-1627 as a weak imitation of Carlo Maderno's façade of the neighbouring church of St. Susanna. According to the inscription, the expenses were borne by the cardinal Scipione Borghese, obviously in return for the "Sleeping Hermaphrodite" (now exhibited in the Louvre), which had been found on the building site of the monastery. [12]

The process of decorating the church took its time. As usual, the chapels had been temporarily furnished with wooden altar constructions, waiting to accomodate the tombs of wealthy donors, whereas one condition was, that the decoration of the chapels had to be in line with Maderno's decorations. In 1647, cardinal Federico Cornaro acquired the rights for the chapel in the left wing of the transept and, at the same time, he made sure, that the dedication of the chapel to St. Theresa would be shifted from the right wing transept to the more favourable side of the gospels. Thus, St. Paul, who had to change over from the main altar to the left wing transept after 1622, was displaced within this church for a second time, again with the previous main altar piece by Gerrit van Honthorst. Cardinal Cornaro, from one of the most influential Venetian families, which had produced six cardinals and one Doge, had resigned from the post as the patriarch of Venice in 1644 due to old age and sickness, and then resided in the Palazzo di San Marco (Palazzo Venezia) in Rome. His connection with the Discalced Carmelites dates back to the year 1633, when the order had been introduced to Venice during his patriarchate. In Rome, pope Urban VIII. appointed him as a member of the Congregatio de propaganda fide, which was also responsible for the training of missionaries. [13]

Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini placed the Vision of the Piercing of the Heart of St. Theresa by a cherub in the centre of the Cornaro chapel (fig. 2), completed in 1651, while the members of the Cornaro family are reverently present on the sides, in the shape of busts lined up behind the balustrades. Bernini designed ecstasy as the interim stage between life and death, the sweet, piercing pain of the transverberation as the saint's death of love, who faints in its levitation into the clouds, while an androgynous angel smiles and reaches out to thrust the arrow towards the heart. Bernini's group above the altar is elevated into the light from above, which is directed downwards by the golden rays. The ceiling fresco confirms the supernatural character of the light with the Holy Ghost's dove hovering in the divine light, and, simultaneously, the motto in the scroll of the Cornaro chapel reads: "nisi coelum creassem, ob te solam crearem" - If I had not created heaven, I would create it for you only - as the word of God. [14] In this way, the depiction and the inscription produce a highly pointed Concetto, i.e. initially, the fusion of the ecstatic vision with the temporary ascension to heaven and, taking it from that point - for the Initiated - the allusive analogy between the ascension of the order's founder with the ascension of the prophet Elia to heaven referred to by the biblical passage on the creation of heaven. [15]

With the daring erotic depiction of St.Theresa in a church of the Discalced Carmelites, Bernini presented the new type of counter-reformative saints, who simultaneously yielded to the heights of ecstasy in order to achieve supernatural visions, who proved to be of virtue, and who were efficient defenders and propagators of the Catholic faith and who were thereby meeting the new requirements. [16] The Council of Trent had reacted to the criticism of worship of saints and relics by reformers and humanists such as Erasmus of Rotterdam, by admitting instances of abuse; nevertheless, the worship of saints, relics and the images was unwaveringly recommended. The saints' legends were subjected to historical criticism, though, and this strictened the process of canonization. Between 1523 and 1588, the Catholic church refused to admit any new saints, however, they were then forced to take action, since simultaneously, the Protestants intensified their worship of martyrs of their faith. Ever since 1588, the task of examining sanctity was in the hands of a committee of cardinals, and in 1610, the pope claimed the exclusive right of canonization, the procedures of which were then strictly formalized by pope Urban VIII. between 1625 and 1634. The procedures of canonization could be initiated no sooner than 50 years after the death of the candidate. What was required were proof of the heroic degree of virtue and of the miracles that had been performed on the basis of the interception by the candidate.

Carlo Borromeo and Filippo Neri, like the first saints of the Jesuits and Theresa of Avila, had been able to successfully survive these procedures before the rule was strictened. Apart from a virtuous life, numerous visions and the foundation of an order, Filippo Neri had been able to witness numerous testified miracles during his lifetime, such as the apparition of the Madonna with a simultaneous levitation (fig. 3). [17] His canonization in 1622 ensued only 27 years after his death; a contemporary of the name of Carlo Borromeo, being a nephew of pope Pius IV though, completed the procedures in only 26 years (1610). The strictened rules and requirements prevented further canonizations between 1629 and 1658. [18] The centralization and formalization excluded national and local saints from official recognition by the church. The new rules turned out to be the undoing of Padre Domenico di Gesù e Maria, since the procedures initiated for him in 1670, were not successful, so that he finally ranked among the numerous unsuccessful candidates following a renewed effort in the 19th century. [19]

In the church S. Maria della Vittoria, the ceiling painting created by Giovanni Domenico Cerrini around 1671/75 (fig. 4), clearly reiterates its propagandistic function. It depicts the triumphal apotheosis of Mary with a sceptre, who is carried on clouds by angels and putti, as the sun and queen of heaven, and as the leader of the ecclesia militans. Beneath her, a heavenly combat force with the sword-wielding archangels Raphael and Michael are depicted as pioneering forces. They defeat the apocalyptical dragon and precipitate four heretics, with all their books into damnation, like fallen angels. A scroll on the side of the overthrown heretics lists: "in nomini meo ascribatur victoria. reg. ii.c.xii" - victory has been subscribed to my name. Above the head of Mary, the inscription reads "cunctas haereses sola interemisti" - Thou solely hath destroyed all heresy. [20] This motto, which one reads when leaving the church, serves to reinstate the proper Catholic faith in the Faithful, exactly like the ceiling fresco.



Installations of Sacred Images

Following reformative accusations of idolatry, the cultic worship of images was difficult to justify, even for the Council of Trent. The Council introduced a distinction from pagan worship of idols by means of a hierarchical definition of conduct, which is largely based on rules as defined by Gregory the Great: God is worshipped, the Saints are revered, while the images are venerated, since the depictions lead the spirit towards the prototypes. [21] In the "Discorso intorno alle imagini sacre e profane" published in 1582, the archbishop of Bologna, Gabriele Paleotti, regarded the definition of the distinction between sacred and profane paintings, the definition of the relation between the sacred image and the prototype of the depicted person, and the issue of how to steer the image cult within acceptable bounds, as his most important mission. According to the graded sanctity of images, from those, God had commissioned, down to those depicting something religious, Paleotti defined eight categories of "sacred images". Images on which God had performed miracles ranked sixth; these were the ones showing beaming faces, movements, shed tears or blood, or which entailed miraculous cures of the blind and which were proven to ward off dangers. [22] Paleotti intended to overcome the tenacity of the heretics, who condemned the belief in sacred images, by claiming that it was never the physical painting as such that mattered, but always the reference function of an image.

In fact, the main problem did not only consist in how to define the relation between the depiction and the prototypes, but also how the reference function could be taught and practised, and how idolatry could be prevented. Paleotti made three distinctions about paintings: the material, the figure and beauty (forma), and the image (imagine) resulting from both, however, representing something different from the one it is associated with by similarity. This triple division accords with the three ways of contemplation: the first focuses on the material, the second on the artistic skill and the third on the object represented in the painting by means of similarity. Paleotti did not concern himself any further with the first two, since they had nothing to do with respect or reverence. In the third mode, he saw the chance to distinguish the Catholic way of worshipping icons from pagan idolatry and to channel adoration of images towards the sacred persons represented in those images. However - apart from the intentional - he could not name any other difference in conduct: "In worshipping the sacred images of Christ, the Virgin and the Saints, we are worshipping Christ, the Virgin and the Saints, who are represented in the images; and when we kneel in front of their images, it is like kneeling in front of them [the Saints...]". [23]

Thus it becomes clear, that neither the reference to the intention of the Faithful, nor the distinction between the physical contemplation with one's eyes and the intellectual contemplation, served to establish a distinction of the conduct of the Faithful, or to justify worship of images to outsiders. Rome set the model for the revival of the cult about sacred images following the Council of Trent, with chapels and altar constructions of magnificant splendour, and no traces of those previous considerations were left in this process. In fact, Rome rather propagated the worship of sacred images against a backdrop of strategic considerations inspired by religious policies, predominantly with respect to those images, which had distinguished themselves by their origin, age and miraculous powers.

One of the first triumphant post-Tridentine stagings of a sacred image, the "Madonna della Clemenza" from the beginning of the 8th century, was undertaken by Cardinal Marcus Siticus Altemps in his family chapel in S. Maria in Trastevere, which he had had built between 1584 and 1589 by Martino Longhi, to the left of the apse. [24] During the consecration in 1593, the icon was ceremoniously transferred from a small chapel in the left aisle into the altar of the Cappella Altemps. [25] In its vault, scenes from the life of St. Mary are depicted around the central Assumption of the Virgin Mary. On the side walls, two large frescos show the Council of Trent and the confirmation of the Tridentine Decrees by pope Pius IV, the uncle of Marcus Siticus Altemps and Carlo Borromeo. One fresco claims the primacy of the Pope with the allegoric group around the papal Ecclesia, which is put in front of the auditorium of the bishops, the other refers to the submission of the Council to his prime power of decision. The icon in the centre confirms the political claim, by depicting the papal donor, probably John VII (705-707), directly subordinated to the divine Empress, in order to take up his regency without reverence for his sovereign, the ruler of Byzantium. [26] With the restaging ceremony, the icon - an image that had acquired sacred status by means of its antique origin and legend - was directly involved in the displays of power by the papacy and the reformed church.

Almost simultaneously, two other important restagings of sacred images took place at the beginning of the pontificate of Paul V. Borghese (1605-1621), firstly, the restaging in S. Maria Maggiore, commissioned by the pope, and secondly, in S. Maria in Vallicella, the church of the Oratorians. The refurbishment of the S. Maria Maggiore which was begun in 1605 and completed in 1613, was undertaken for the important icon of St. Luke "Salus Populi Romani". In 1605, pope Paul V. ordered to erect in S. Maria Maggiore a chapel as a companion to the local Cappella Sistina of Sixtus V, with identical layout plans, as the tomb of Clement VIII and himself, as well as for the new presentation of the popular icon, and to have it lavishly decorated (fig. 5). The icon, installed like a relic, in a chest set with precious stones, inside the bronze relief of the main altar, was the centre of the cappella nobilissima of Girolamo Rainaldi and Pompeo Targone. The gilded bronze relief of hovering angels, together with the chest, has a lapis lazuli background and is framed by two jasper columns each, supporting an entablature and a broken, pedimental gable set with two large angels, depicting in its opening a curved protuberance with the Liberius relief of Stefano Maderno. Beneath the cornice, the splendour of the precious materials and sculptures continues; in the vaulting, gilded stucco frames the paintings by Cavaliere d'Arpino, Guido Reni and Cigol. In 1642, Giovanni Baglione rightly pointed out the role of the extraordinarily precious materials used for the presentation of the icon. [27]

The magnificent staging of the icon as a a church image, is being justified by a complex programme consisting of Mariology incorporated in the physical triangle of the Trinity, and the iconography of the Catholic reform, which is propagated by early Christianity until well into the 14th century by exemplary figures. The link to contemporary iconography is predominantly sustained by the reliefs of the papal monuments. The depiction of how the history of salvation evolved for the purposes of staging the icon, the depiction of Queen Kunigunde of Poland, the scenes of war and reconciliation in the papal monuments - all of these were programmatically motivated. It may not be exaggerated to assume that - due to its splendour and its selection of images, as well as the appropriation of the icon by the pope - the Capella Paolina is a "exemple caractéristique de la lutte engagée par l'art contre le Protestantisme". [28] After all, the adoption of the icon into the care of the pope in one of the major pilgrim churches, ended the previous responsibility of the City of Rome and assigned St. Luke's icon to the Catholic hemisphere. [29]

The programme of the Cappella Paolino was designed by two Oratorians, members of the brotherhood of Filippo Neri. [30] To find a historical rationale and to justify this cult, they referred to cardinal Cesare Baronio's church history "Annales ecclesiastici" in twelve volumes, initially published between 1588 and 1607. Cesare Baronio, prior of the Oratorians and director of the Vatican Library, also became abbott of the Camaldolensians in S. Gregorio Magno on the Celio, in 1602. His predecessor, cardinal Antonio Salviati, had built a chapel about 1600 for the madonna, which was believed to have spoken to Gregory, the Great. It was inserted into the right chapel wall in a gilded stone frame, and Giovanni Battista Ricci decorated the wall primed in blue with angels to accompany the picture, and above - blessing the scene - God the father. As an altar piece, Annibale Carracci painted St. Gregory the Great praying, facing the Madonna (fig. 6). [31] Possibly, a confusion with idolatry was imminent due to this arrangement, which - according to Tridentine Decrees, Paleotti, Baronio and others - should have been excluded. For this reason, the pictures Baronio had commissioned for his titular church SS. Nereo e Achilleo or the oratories at S. Gregorio Magno, did not depict the worship of the image, but the worship of the apparition of the Madonna, the prototype.

On behalf of Cesare Baronio, Durante Alberti painted the worship of the apparition of S. Maria in Vallicella for SS. Nereo e Achilleo, which was of like significance for Filippo Neri as for Baronio. A semi-circle of kneeling angels is lined up in the lower register, worshipping the apparition of a madonna in the upper section of the miraculous image. The half-figure apparition of the Madonna with the blessing Child above a crescent moon imitates the miraculous picture of S. Maria in Vallicella, however, it is clearly characterised as the apparition of the prototype of the image and not as the image itself. For the twelve-volume edition of Cesare Baronio's "Annales ecclesiastici", published in Mainz between 1601 and 1608, the same title page was used for all volumes, depicting the miraculous image of S. Maria in Vallicella, supported by angels, above the architecture, and underneath Sts. Paul and Peter in front of columns, and the allogory of the papal faith with key, book and tiara, in front of the plinth area, who are holding the figures of the pagan, and heresy in the shape of discord, in chains. At the feet of St. Paul, above the chained pagan, an inscription reads "subegit gentes" - he has subjugated the pagans - and below St. Peter it reads "vicit hereses" - he has vanquished the heresies. In the eighth volume of the extensive work by Baronio, which is dedicated to Gregory the Great, a full-page wood engraving shows the pope with his parents. Francesco Villamena made a portrait engraving in 1602, depicting cardinal Baronio as the scholar at his desk. On the table, leaning against the crucifix, is a small depiction of three saints standing in adoration at the foot of S. Maria in Vallicella, the miraculous image reinterpreted as an apparition. Quite likely, the pope in the midst of the saints is Gregory the Great. Baronio addressed the relation between the image and the prototype several times in the "Annales ecclesiastici". In accordance with the rules issued by the Council of Trent and as stipulated by Paleotti, he gave the relation between the image and the saints depicted as a reason for the worship of such a picture. In contrast to Paleotti, Baronio however, seemed to assume, that the relation was not merely symbolic, but that the prototypes were "quasi praesente", i.e. allegorically present. [32]



Rubens' adaptations

The repeated installation of the miraculous picture of S. Maria in Vallicella, prepared by Peter Paul Rubens in two versions, allow an insight into the numerous problems concerning the staging of sacred images and how the conduct of the Faithful was being manipulated. The sacred image is a fresco from the 15th century, which had been damaged in 1537 by stoning, as a result of which the Madonna's face started to bleed. In a reaction to this miracle, the Madonna was brought to the nearby church S. Giovanni and it was dedicated to the first side chapel to the left of the entrance of the newly built church started in 1575. Both for Filippo Neri and Cesare Baronio, this miraculous image gained focal significance in trying to achieve a worship of images in line with the rules of the Tridentine Decrees. [33] In 1606, Rubens was commissioned with the main altar piece, and in the following year, he submitted his work (fig. 7) to the Oratorians. The various drafts for the main altar, which have been thought to have been the work of the architect Giovanni Battista Guerra, provide proof for a development that seems to have initially involved displaying the miraculous fresco in the altar wing above a pedimental or a broken gable, and to frame the altar piece by Rubens with several columns. [34] The initial version by Rubens refers to this arrangement in the miraculous picture. Rubens depicts the congregation of the saints as an encounter between the group of Pope Gregory the Great, Maurus and Papianus and the grouping of St. Domitilla with Nereus and Achilleus, in front of an imposing gate. Above the vertex of the archway, the modern interpretation of the miraculous picture is depicted with a painted frame, surrounded by putti and enlightened by a ray of light from heaven. The modern icon, assuming the previous protective function at the gate, is characterised by the light. Gregory with the dove of the Holy Ghost hovering above him, casts his eyes to the skies and points his right hand of mercy at the Faithful in front of the picture, graciously regarded by Domitilla. Rubens also emphasized the immaterial character of the miraculous image by letting one putto reach through the picture's surface with his arm without destroying it. [35]

Baronio had a special relationship to the saints depicted by Rubens, and their relics were to be integrated into a new concept for the high altar. [36] Cesare Baronio died shortly after submitting the work on 30th June 1607, and the Oratorians declared their dissatisfaction with the Rubens painting more than half a year later. In April 1608, the congregation accepted Rubens' proposal for a triptych, in which the saints were to be depicted on separate images in the choir, the miraculous image in the main altar, but surrounded by variant ornamentation. For the main alter, Rubens followed the solution of Donato Alberti for SS. Nereo e Achilleo by aligning a group of kneeling angels in the lower register. However, in contrast to Alberti, the subject of their worship is not an apparition, but the Madonna carried by putti, which is furnished with a gilded relief frame. The modern madonna painted on copper was installed retracted, so that the original miraculous picture behind it could be displayed "by apparition" in the frame. [37] The problem was, that through such a staging by Rubens, the worship by the angels not only focuses on the image reiterated by him, but also on the miraculous image at its second stage, when lowering the front shield. In contrast to the Madonna in S.Gregorio Magno, here, the prototype is the hidden fresco from the 15th century, the miraculous image. The second version by Rubens depicts the image in apparition, carried nigh by angels and refers to the worship of the miraculous picture appearing in the frame.

With the second version, the Oratorians accepted the double worship of the image in 1608. Its immediate effect manifested itself in the worship of images - as disputed in many contemporary writings - in the Cappella Paolina in S. Maria Maggiore, whose propagandistic installation undoubtedly dedicated the icon as a temple image, no matter what declarations were held for or against it. Contrary to the differentiations of the Council of Trent, Paleotti and Baronio, Rubens' second version and the installation of the icon in the Cappella Paolina surrendered to the adoration for the paintings physically present. They thereby followed the honest concession, that an intentional distinction between venerating an image and the worship of the prototype could not be upheld in pious practice and that the worship focused on the painting.



Spreading of the cult

In Rome and the rest of Italy, numerous new installations of the miraculous pictures followed during the first half of the 17th century. A remarkable, direct Roman offspring of grandiose staging is the Cappella della SS. Mariae in the cathedral of Spoleto (fig. 8), for the famous icon of St. Luke, which had been offered to the city as a gift of reconciliation in 1185 by Emperor Barbarossa. In 1626, the Roman architect Giovanni Battista Mola designed a frame made of marble and semi-precious stones (which he had made in Rome) for the chapel on the right of the choir on behalf of Andrea Mauri, surrounded the icon with a large perspective tabernacle, completed by a broken gable and an inscription tableau. The inscription reads: "pinxit opvs lvcas christi venerare parentem lvcas vota feret munera virgo dabit". In the tabernacle, a dove hovers above the picture, on the left and right, the statues of David and Solomon turn towards the onlooker and point towards the icon; in the chapel interior, half-figure reliefs of the donors are lined up on both sides, facing the image reverently. [38] The chapel of Giovanni Battista Mola for the icon of Spoleto represents a diminutive version of the Cappella Paolina in S. Maria Maggiore and likewise displays the icon as a temple image.

Little documentation is available on the countless new installations of sacred images ensuing in the first half of the 17th century all over Italy and later, in other Catholic regions, mainly between 1650 and 1800. Contemporaries would compile universal histories or catalogues of the miraculous images, such as the "Historia Universale delle Imagini miracolose" by Giovanni Felice Astolfi in 1623, or the universal "Atlas Marianus" by Wilhelm Gumppenberg. [39] The frontispiece created by Melchior Haffner for the Munich edition in 1672, shows the Casa di Loreto with the Madonna in the space between heaven and earth, carried by angels. Gumppenberg had a special relationship with the Madonna di Loreto, to which he started off on a pilgrimage in 1632. During the following fourty years, eighteen Loreto-chapels were built in Bavaria only. [40] In contrast to this, there were only isolated new installations of sacred images in altar constructions and chapels north of the Alps. In 1629, a relief of a madonna with child on a throne, dating from the 14th century, was installed into a new altar construction in a Preysing-chapel of the monastery church Seligental in Landshut and enhanced to become a significant depiction by means of angels and clouds. [41]



Art quality: Collectors' items

The problems about the status of religious paintings was continued in the upheaval about the paintings of the Madonna with Child, surrounded by a floral garland. For these paintings, Jan Brueghel "the Elder" cooperated with artists Hendrik van Balen and Peter Paul Rubens. For all it seems, the idea for this new iconographic type of painting dated back to cardinal Federico Borromeo, the archbishop of Milan, who was involved in the new concept in S. Maria in Vallicella. Rubens had taken his first version (fig. 7) to Antwerp and displayed it above the grave of his mother in the church of St. Michael. Towards the end of 1607, Federico Borromeo must have given out instructions to Jan Brueghel, whom he had known since his work in Milan in 1596, probably for the "Madonna within a floral garland", which is presently displayed in the Ambrosiana in Milan, and, which was commissioned at the same time as the huge "Bouquet in the glass vase". [42] The half-figure of the Madonna with child in a landscape was painted on an oval silver plate by Hendrik van Balen and inserted into the copper plate, and finally set in a narrow silver frame. Brueghel's oval floral garland takes on the function of a second frame. What is significant is, that this small painting was destined for the collection of the cardinal, the quadreria, which became the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana in 1618. This fact may point out the problem finding a possible solution for this issue: how can a picture, that formally reiterated the montage of the image tabernacle, be integrated into the context of a collection? Borromeo's instructions aimed at incorporating this context by integrating the Madonna into a painting. [43] Together with Rubens, Jan Brueghel "the Elder" probably repeated a "Madonna in a Flower garland" for cardinal Borromeo in 1617, and around 1620, the grand version in Munich was created (fig. 9). The later versions differ from the first in that the integration of the Madonnas inside the garland is fictitional.

The Madonna in the flower garland appeared instantly in the exhibitions of art galleries, cabinets and chambers. In the "Allegory of Vision" from 1617 in the Prado, Rubens and Jan Brueghel "the Elder" placed a substantially enlarged derivative of the version, now in the Louvre, in the foreground. The parrot of the Madonna and the Imitatio have alighted on the frame. Another image is placed behind this picture, whose visible upper third is partially covered by a curtain. A vertical ray of light from the skies and hovering angels can be made out on this image, which implies the announcement to the shepherds. It refers to the Madonna in front, because a large angel with a scroll seems to come straight out of the image, over the upper frame of the Madonna. The allegory of the face, or vision, describes the problem of seeing several images inside the image, at variant levels of reality. Simultaneously, it incorporates the problem of the integration of the "Madonna in the flower garland", which is ranked and commented upon as a religious work of art, within the context of an art collection. The Madonna, standing on the ground together with profane works of art, or the winged altar from the beginning of the 16th century, has not yet found its place in the collection. [44] In "Cabinet of an art lover with donkey-headed iconoclasts" by Frans Francken II., from 1619 (fig. 10), the Madonna is integrated within the collection and mounted on the wall in the midst of landscape paintings. With this art cabinet, Francken demonstrates, that what the donkey-headed iconoclasts are intending to destroy are treasures of nature and art, which deserve to be appreciated and preserved.

The art trade and the cabinets of art lovers disrupted the distinction between sacred and profane images, on which the Catholic defence of the image-worshipping cult was based. This distinction was successfully undermined by art traders and collectors by their focusing on the art itself and the works of art of famous artists. They sealed the separation, both between the subject depicted and the artistic qualities, as well as the recognition of works of art of variant origin. In his "Atelier of Apelles", created around 1630, Willem van Haecht propagated the universal influence of the most famous artists of antiquity. Anachronistically, he placed Apelles painting Campaspe - the lover of Alexander the Great - in that ruler's presence, in the midst of an imagined ideal art gallery. Van Haecht thereby caused a confrontation between the present work and the collection of numerous Italian, Dutch, Flemish and German paintings from the 16th and 17th century. The works of the countless successors of Apelles are displayed across the walls. What is remarkable is, that - in referring to Apelles - van Haecht depicted the nordic works as equal to Italian pieces, and thereby followed Carel van Mander's strategy, who - being a Vasari of the North - had propagated for the first time the equality of Dutch and German painting with Italian art in 1604. Even before the rudophian artists, Hans Holbein was the first "crown witness" van Mander claimed had not been in Italy. [45] This claim served van Mander to introduce a distinction of the Northern countries against Italy, because in doing so he was able to exclude Italy from the rocky and desolate Switzerland in the issue on the origin of the beautiful style of the celebrated painter. This is in line with van Mander's main intention to establish a status of independence for Nordic and, specifically, Flemish painting as opposed to Italian art in the competition with Vasari's "Vite". Van Mander claimed about the rudolphian court artists Bartholomäus Spranger, Hans von Aachen and Georg Hoefnagel, that they had learned nothing from the indigenous artists during their stays in Italy, however, they had been appreciated by the Italian patrons just like the indigenous competitors. [46] On Holbein, van Mander cites a statement by Federico Zuccaro, as recorded by Hendrick Goltzius, according to which the Triumphs of Riches and Poverty in the London Steelyard had a higher regard than the works of Raphael. [47] In this, van Mander found his triumphant argument: According to the judgement of an Italian painter, Holbein had outclassed the best artist of Italy, although he had never been in that country.

Van Mander's strategy seemed to find approval in the galleries and cabinets North of the Alps, where the Dutch and Flemish painters were a strong competition. From Antwerp, Rubens operated the distribution of his works in Europe with his workshop and controlled reproduction. Still, Rome remained capital of art in the first two thirds of the 17th century. Artists flocked there, set up their own national colonies in Rome and tried to claim a stake in the Roman art business, or to supply outside customers from Rome. [48] However, the products of the Northern schools of painting were not able to compete with the triumphant progress of Italian art in the first half of the 17th century, no matter where they had been created. In the second and third decade, Caravaggio's style dominated European art production. [49] The Bologna school of the Carracci, Guido Reni, Domenichino and Guercino, legitimated by works for Rome, created a competitive situation for this trend with regard to collectors. [50] This message from Rome in the 17th century and the preference for Italian art among collectors, which was only curbed by the new responsibility by the princely residence around 1670, have been almost fully publicized by means of numerous studies. [51]

What is less obvious and what has therefore hardly been investigated, is the highly successful type of religious collectors' painting newly developed in Rome. Even before Federico Borromeo had his ideas for the Madonna in a flower garland carried out by Jan Brueghel "the Elder" in Antwerp, Caravaggio revived historical half-figure paintings with a religious subject as elements of art collections. At the beginning of the 17th century, basing on the current Flemish contemporary paintings and the Venetian worship paintings of the 15th century, Caravaggio painted historical landscape-format paintings with half-figures, in Rome, for collectors such as Ciriaco Mattei, e.g."Christ in Emmaus". [52] The use as a gallery painting allowed the depiction of Christ and his disciples as normal persons and to interpret the sacred theme as a table scene. The half-figures facilitated the life-size depiction of the characters without having to resort to a huge format and a focus on the physiognomies and gestures. Caravaggio's model of the both religious yet profane collectors' painting whilst maintaining the landscape format preferred by collectors, was instantly copied and spread profusely by Guercino, Valentin de Boulogne, Giovanni Serodine, Pietro da Cortona and others.

FOOTNOTES