DOI article:
Krasny, Piotr: Exempla viva: the prelates of the Roman Catholic Church as inspirers of Charles Borromeo’s instructions on shaping sacred srt
DOI Page / Citation link: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.38234#0058
57
particularly eminent places and often exceeding the altars
on which the only-born Son of God has been daily im-
molated to his eternal Father for the salvation of the hu-
mankind’. Giberti recommended that such memorials be
removed from churches and the bodies of the dead they
commemorated be transferred to simple tombs modestly
located in the corners of the church.133
An even more radical attitude towards commemorat-
ing the dead in churches was that of Ercole Gonzaga at
the beginning of his tenure as bishop of Mantua. In his
programme of major reforms of the diocese, compiled in
1537, he decided that all privileges allowing wealthy fami-
lies to bury their dead in the churches should be revoked.
Gonzaga also intended to oblige church rectors to remove
tomb monuments from church interiors and transfer the
remains of the dead to cemeteries.134 He did not manage
to put this intention into practice, but during the refur-
bishment of Mantua Cathedral he ordered, as recorded by
Daino, the magnificent tombs of his ancestors (including
the tomb of Ludovico Gonzaga, the first captain general
from his family) to be removed from the chancel, and the
bodies be taken out of the sarcophagi and put in the crypt
in wooden caskets. Parts of these monuments were pre-
served during the refurbishment135, yet did not return to
their original locations but were dispersed all over the ca-
thedral complex. Gonzaga did not substantiate this ‘purg-
ing’ of the cathedral in writing, considering these steps,
so it seems, to serve as an eloquent example, encouraging
other church administrators to undertake similar actions.
Apparently also the tomb monument of Cardinal Pole,
who was buried in Canterbury Cathedral, was supposed
to serve as a similar example. It had the form of a flat in-
scribed slab, without the likeness of the deceased, incor-
porated into the church floor, and therefore, following
133 ‘honorifico et in altum suspenso mausoleo’; ‘mira arte et maxima
cum impensa laborata sepulcra in locis eminentibus et plerumque
altaria excedentibus, super quibus unigentius Dei Filius aeter-
no Patri quotidie pro humani generis salute immolatur’, I.M. Gi-
BERTus, ‘Constitutiones ex Sanctorum Patrum dictis et canoni-
cis institiutis collectae’, in idem, Opera nunc primum collecta, ed.
by I. Bragadenus, Veronae 1733, p. 84. See also K.B. Hiesinger,
‘The Fregoso Monument’, p. 284 (as in note 126); B. Boucher,
The Sculpture of Jacopo Sansovino, vol. 1, New Haven, 1991, p. 44;
H. Colvin, Architecture, p. 220 (as in note 126); P. Humfrey, ‘Ve-
ronese’s High Altarpiece for San Sebastiano. A Patrician Commis-
sion for a Counter Reformation Church’, in Venice Reconsidered.
The History and Civilisation of an Italian City State, Baltimore,
2000, p. 377; Y. Asher, ‘The Two Monuments of Bishop Barto-
lomeo Averoldi’, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 65, 2002, no. 1,
p. 108; J.K. Nelson, R.J. Zeckhauser, ‘Theories and Distinction’,
p. 59 (as in note 131).
134 P.V. Murphy, ‘Politics, Piety and Reform. Lay Religiosity in Six-
teenth Century Mantua’, in Confraternities and Catholic Reform in
Italy, France and Spain, ed. by P. Donnelly, M.V. Maher, Kirksville,
1999, p. 49; idem, Ruling Peacefully, p. 74 (as in note 26).
135 G. Daino, De origine, p. 142 (as in note 91).
John Edwards, it may be assumed that it conformed to
the reformist tendencies in sepulchral art propagated by
Giberti.136 It is worth noting that the appearance of Pole’s
monument was known in northern Italy, for example,
through a description made by Dominique Lampsone
(1532-1599)137, a secretary to the late cardinal, while Bor-
romeo could have learned about the forms of the slab di-
rectly from Goldwell who officiated at the funeral of the
English cardinal138 and was likely involved in commemo-
rating the deceased.
Also Barbaro joined in the choir of critics of the ‘inso-
lence of tomb monuments’. In commentaries to his trans-
lation of Vitruvius, he polemicised with the pagan writer
who indicated benefits for the society from commemorat-
ing illustrious men by means of sumptuous monuments.
The Venetian prelate wrote passionately that ‘monuments
and tombs located in churches, which dwarf with their
size not only the chapels erected to contain them, but also
the most eminent places, are not worthy of such praise.
They are often erected taller than the saintly altars, with
prominently displayed memorial inscriptions, titles of
the dead, epigrams, war trophies and other signs of vari-
ous dignities. Such vivid portraits hewn out of the finest
stones that can be seen in them and such laudatory epi-
taphs that can be read in them, would be more fitting for
markets or other public squares, rather than for churches,
and even there exclusively monuments to the most emi-
nent people should be erected, in order to serve as an ex-
ample for the citizens’.139
The main tenor of the criticism of secular appearance
of tomb monuments, and especially of decorating them
with ‘trophies’, sounds very similar in both Barbaros and
Borromeo’s texts, and it may be assumed that the Arch-
bishop of Milan drew particularly strong inspiration from
the writings of the coadjutor bishop to the Patriarch of
Aquileia. The firm conviction of the Venetian that such
monuments were absolutely inappropriate for a church
interior may also have motivated Borromeo to take pow-
erful measures aimed at purging his cathedral and other
136 J. Edwards, Archbishop Pole, s. 240 (as in note 30).
137 T.F. Mayer, ‘Marcello Who? An Italian Painter in Cardinal Pole’s
Entourage’, Source. Notes in the History of Art, 15, 1996, no. 2,
pp. 22, 24.
138 J. Edwards, Archbishop Pole, pp. 239-240 (as in note 30).
139 ‘non è lodevole, che i monumenti ò sepulture siano nelle chiese,
pure egli si usa à grandezza nelle capelle à questo con pregio ap-
propriate, e in luoghi eminenti si pongono più alte de i sacri al-
tari e s’appongono le memorie, i titoli, gli eppigrammi, i trofei e
le insegne de gli antipassati, dove le vere effigie di bellissime e fi-
nissime pietre si vedono, e i gloriosi gesti in lettere d’oro intagliati
si leggono cose da esser poste più presto nel foro e nella piazza,
che nella chiesa, e solamente de gli huomini illustri e di quelli le
opere virtuose de i quali esser possono di memorabile e imitabile
essempio a i cittadini’, M. Vitruvio, I dieci libri, p. 125 (as in note
76).
particularly eminent places and often exceeding the altars
on which the only-born Son of God has been daily im-
molated to his eternal Father for the salvation of the hu-
mankind’. Giberti recommended that such memorials be
removed from churches and the bodies of the dead they
commemorated be transferred to simple tombs modestly
located in the corners of the church.133
An even more radical attitude towards commemorat-
ing the dead in churches was that of Ercole Gonzaga at
the beginning of his tenure as bishop of Mantua. In his
programme of major reforms of the diocese, compiled in
1537, he decided that all privileges allowing wealthy fami-
lies to bury their dead in the churches should be revoked.
Gonzaga also intended to oblige church rectors to remove
tomb monuments from church interiors and transfer the
remains of the dead to cemeteries.134 He did not manage
to put this intention into practice, but during the refur-
bishment of Mantua Cathedral he ordered, as recorded by
Daino, the magnificent tombs of his ancestors (including
the tomb of Ludovico Gonzaga, the first captain general
from his family) to be removed from the chancel, and the
bodies be taken out of the sarcophagi and put in the crypt
in wooden caskets. Parts of these monuments were pre-
served during the refurbishment135, yet did not return to
their original locations but were dispersed all over the ca-
thedral complex. Gonzaga did not substantiate this ‘purg-
ing’ of the cathedral in writing, considering these steps,
so it seems, to serve as an eloquent example, encouraging
other church administrators to undertake similar actions.
Apparently also the tomb monument of Cardinal Pole,
who was buried in Canterbury Cathedral, was supposed
to serve as a similar example. It had the form of a flat in-
scribed slab, without the likeness of the deceased, incor-
porated into the church floor, and therefore, following
133 ‘honorifico et in altum suspenso mausoleo’; ‘mira arte et maxima
cum impensa laborata sepulcra in locis eminentibus et plerumque
altaria excedentibus, super quibus unigentius Dei Filius aeter-
no Patri quotidie pro humani generis salute immolatur’, I.M. Gi-
BERTus, ‘Constitutiones ex Sanctorum Patrum dictis et canoni-
cis institiutis collectae’, in idem, Opera nunc primum collecta, ed.
by I. Bragadenus, Veronae 1733, p. 84. See also K.B. Hiesinger,
‘The Fregoso Monument’, p. 284 (as in note 126); B. Boucher,
The Sculpture of Jacopo Sansovino, vol. 1, New Haven, 1991, p. 44;
H. Colvin, Architecture, p. 220 (as in note 126); P. Humfrey, ‘Ve-
ronese’s High Altarpiece for San Sebastiano. A Patrician Commis-
sion for a Counter Reformation Church’, in Venice Reconsidered.
The History and Civilisation of an Italian City State, Baltimore,
2000, p. 377; Y. Asher, ‘The Two Monuments of Bishop Barto-
lomeo Averoldi’, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 65, 2002, no. 1,
p. 108; J.K. Nelson, R.J. Zeckhauser, ‘Theories and Distinction’,
p. 59 (as in note 131).
134 P.V. Murphy, ‘Politics, Piety and Reform. Lay Religiosity in Six-
teenth Century Mantua’, in Confraternities and Catholic Reform in
Italy, France and Spain, ed. by P. Donnelly, M.V. Maher, Kirksville,
1999, p. 49; idem, Ruling Peacefully, p. 74 (as in note 26).
135 G. Daino, De origine, p. 142 (as in note 91).
John Edwards, it may be assumed that it conformed to
the reformist tendencies in sepulchral art propagated by
Giberti.136 It is worth noting that the appearance of Pole’s
monument was known in northern Italy, for example,
through a description made by Dominique Lampsone
(1532-1599)137, a secretary to the late cardinal, while Bor-
romeo could have learned about the forms of the slab di-
rectly from Goldwell who officiated at the funeral of the
English cardinal138 and was likely involved in commemo-
rating the deceased.
Also Barbaro joined in the choir of critics of the ‘inso-
lence of tomb monuments’. In commentaries to his trans-
lation of Vitruvius, he polemicised with the pagan writer
who indicated benefits for the society from commemorat-
ing illustrious men by means of sumptuous monuments.
The Venetian prelate wrote passionately that ‘monuments
and tombs located in churches, which dwarf with their
size not only the chapels erected to contain them, but also
the most eminent places, are not worthy of such praise.
They are often erected taller than the saintly altars, with
prominently displayed memorial inscriptions, titles of
the dead, epigrams, war trophies and other signs of vari-
ous dignities. Such vivid portraits hewn out of the finest
stones that can be seen in them and such laudatory epi-
taphs that can be read in them, would be more fitting for
markets or other public squares, rather than for churches,
and even there exclusively monuments to the most emi-
nent people should be erected, in order to serve as an ex-
ample for the citizens’.139
The main tenor of the criticism of secular appearance
of tomb monuments, and especially of decorating them
with ‘trophies’, sounds very similar in both Barbaros and
Borromeo’s texts, and it may be assumed that the Arch-
bishop of Milan drew particularly strong inspiration from
the writings of the coadjutor bishop to the Patriarch of
Aquileia. The firm conviction of the Venetian that such
monuments were absolutely inappropriate for a church
interior may also have motivated Borromeo to take pow-
erful measures aimed at purging his cathedral and other
136 J. Edwards, Archbishop Pole, s. 240 (as in note 30).
137 T.F. Mayer, ‘Marcello Who? An Italian Painter in Cardinal Pole’s
Entourage’, Source. Notes in the History of Art, 15, 1996, no. 2,
pp. 22, 24.
138 J. Edwards, Archbishop Pole, pp. 239-240 (as in note 30).
139 ‘non è lodevole, che i monumenti ò sepulture siano nelle chiese,
pure egli si usa à grandezza nelle capelle à questo con pregio ap-
propriate, e in luoghi eminenti si pongono più alte de i sacri al-
tari e s’appongono le memorie, i titoli, gli eppigrammi, i trofei e
le insegne de gli antipassati, dove le vere effigie di bellissime e fi-
nissime pietre si vedono, e i gloriosi gesti in lettere d’oro intagliati
si leggono cose da esser poste più presto nel foro e nella piazza,
che nella chiesa, e solamente de gli huomini illustri e di quelli le
opere virtuose de i quali esser possono di memorabile e imitabile
essempio a i cittadini’, M. Vitruvio, I dieci libri, p. 125 (as in note
76).