INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quali heavily dependent upon the quality of the original The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand ‘markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction, 1 PLEASE NOTE: The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document Photographed is “Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spticed into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a ‘good image of the page in the adjacent frame. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being Photographed the photographer followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. . The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from “photographs” if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of “photographs” may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. Some pages may have indistinct print, Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms {300 North Zee Road ‘Ann Atbor, Michigan 4810676-16,829 LUCHS, Alison, 1948- CESTELLO: A CISTERCIAN CHURCH OF THE FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE. The Johns Hopkins University, Ph. Fine Arts 1976 Xerox University Microfilms , Ann arsor, Michigan 48105 © 1976 ALISON LUCHS ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDPLEASE NOTE: Page 419 Is lacking in nunber only, no text is missing. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS.CESTELLO: A Cistercian Church of the Florentine Renaissance by Alison Luchs A dissertation submitted to the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Baltimore, Maryland 1975To my mother and fatheriii - ABSTRACT Artistic developments at the Florentine convent called Cestello (now Santa Maria Maddalena dei Pazzi) paralleled a period of resurgence for the Cistereians who had occupied it since 1442. The Cistercian order, traditionally respected and employed by the Florentine republic, was nevertheless in decline in the early fifteenth century. A recovery for the ordei began with Pope Eugene IV's reforms. By the 1480's this had culminated in release from the demoralizing comendatory system, creation of the Congregation of Saint Bernard, a junp in Tuscan professions to the Cistercian order, and intense architectural activity at Gestello and its mother abbey, Settimo. The Cestello campaign began in 1451 with foundation of a cappella maggiore. It went on to add nave chapels and a special choir installation to the simple thirteenth-century church, increasing and differentiating the space allotted for various liturgical functions. Trabeated Ionic colonnades turned a courtyard between the church and the street into a stately entrance to the convent, at the same time symbolizing the Cister- cians' cloistered life. This cloister's form reflected Tuscan prototypes and certain Albertian concepts, perhaps in an effort to surpass the nearby Santissima Annunziata with nobler and moremodern architecture. While the convent grew according to a traditional Cistercian plan, the church itself shows little evidence of concern with Cistercian architecture. Irregularities in the chapel sizes and shapes were probably imposed by the intermittent construction process and the need to adapt existing structures. But chapel entrance arches of exactly equal width produced the effect of uniformity. The arch measure~ ments, their rich sculptural decoration, and certain personal con- nections support the traditional attribution of the church (at least after 1488) to Giuliano da Sangallo, to whom Vasari attri- buted the entrance cloister (begun c. 1491). One Cistercian account book records a payment to Giuliano and his brother Antonio for an unidentified model in 1491. Evidence suggests that the nave chapels, part of the prolif- eration of private chapels in Quattrocento Florence, resulted from an active Cistercian quest for patrons. While many came from the Santa Croce neighborhood, other patrons represented several dif- ferent parts of the city. A variety of religious, social and business ties bound them to the Cistercians and each other. Most belonged to respected professions and held civic offices. Lorenzo de! Medici's erest in land speculation in the Cesteilo region may have made him the power behind several of his close associates who patronized Cestello. Although most of the chapel founders desired memorial masses,ao few requested burial at Cestello, and many owned other chapels elsewhere. All seemed interested in displaying their arms and generosity at the increasingly prestigious church of a respected Florentine order. A wealth of art works resulted from the Cestello campaign between 1480 and 1526. While there is no evidence of an overall iconographic program, many of the paintings reflect interests of the Cistercians as well as their patrons. There are also stylistic connections between certain altarpieces, and considerable uniformity of size, harmonizing with the chapel proportions. ‘The Cistercians may wave deliberately sought works from the most prominent contem- porary Florentine artists-~including Botticelli, Ghirlandaio, Lorenzo di Credi, Perugino and Cosimo Rosselli-~several of whom had previously collaborated on such major commissions as the Sistine Chapel walls. ‘The conbined forces of Cistercian recovery, the order's, Florentine traditions, Medici urbanistic schemes and the compe- titive zeal of Florentine patrons fostered a unique complex of Florentine Renaissance art and architecture at Cestello.ACKNOWLEDGMENTS T owe a debt of gratitude to many who aided in the prepara~ tion of this study. The National Gallery of Art in Washington supported my research with a Chester Dale Fellowship for 1974-5. In Florence I received invaluable help from the facilities and staffs of the Archivio di Stato, the Biblioteca Nazionale, Casa Buonarotti, the Fortezza da Basso, the Kuasthistorisches Institut, the Soprintendenza alle Gallerie, the Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, and the Seminario Maggiore di San Frediano in Cestello. The Liceo Michelangelo made possible examination of the old convent, and the Carmelite Sisters of Santa Maria Maddalena dei Paz: i in Caregei provided kind hospitality and access to their archive. In addition, this paper reflects the contributions of many generous individuals. F. Williem Keat, Michael Mallet, Anthony Molho and John Najeny aided my search through the Florentine archives and advised on various aspects of Florentine history. Candida Allanbrook assisted with bibliographic and Linguistic problems, Caroline Elam and Alison Brown shared documents and ideas on urban development and Bartolomeo Scala. Richard Gold- thwaite offered guidance on mumerous problems of economic and social history. Christiane Giinther helped with Library manu- script research. Rab Hatfield provided information on the Torna- buoni family, John Henderson on confraternities, and Marco Spal- lanzani on Florentine families. Eunice Howe secured informationvii - from rare sources in Rome, Melinda Lesher shared her studies on the writings and legends of Saint Bernard of Glairvaux. Ugo Procacci advised on the dating of the Rustici Codex. Richard Trexler provided access to his studies on the involvement of reli- gious orders in Florentine government. In Renaissance architectural investigations T benefited from the observations of Linda Najemy and Father Richard Lanoureux. Father Lamoureux also provided several illustrations, as did Dorothy Glass. Giuseppe Harchini offered bibliographical guidance, and Antonio Bigazzi made available crucial recent drawings of the Cestello complex. Guido Morozzi advised on the restoration after the 1966 flood. R, Bertos shared ideas on the Perugino painting, Vivian Ebers- man on the Ridolfo del Ghirlandaio, Sheldon Grossman on the Lorenzo di Credi, Roberta Olson on the Botticelli, and Everett Fahy on Renaissance frames and the painted angels in the cappella maggiore, Clifton Olds advised on the cult of Saint Jerome. Sylvie Béguin furnished important information on the Louvre paintings, and Vitaly Suslov provided bibliography on the Hermitage painting. Advice on Cistercian history, Liturgy and inscriptions came from W. J. Telesca aud from Fathers L. J. Lekai of the Cistercian Abbey, Dallas; Edmond Mikkers of the Cistercian Abbey, Achel, Bel- gium; Goffredo Viti of the Certosa, Florence, and Polycarge Zakar of the Cistercian Casa Generalizia, Rome.+ viii - ‘The Institute of Cistercian Studies at Western Michigan Uni- versity, Kalamazoo, Michigan provided bibliography and guidance. Madeleine Hours and the staff of the Laboratoire de Recherche des Musées de France kindly conducted tests to determine the medium of three Cestello paintings in the Louvre (altarpieces 1, 4 and 6). Special thanks are due to Staale Sinding-Larsen, who advised on Liturgical problems and aided patiently with measurements in the church and cloister; Hans Teubner, who made important structural observations on the site and shared a wealth of knowledge of fif- teenth-century churches; and Gino Corti, whose constant and generous assistance included many of the transcriptions and documentary findings used in this study. ‘The Augustinian Assumptionist Fathers of Santa Maria Maddalena dei Pazzi in Florence, with their hospitality, good humor and enthusiasm, made the study of their church a joyful experience. In writing I benefited from the editorial and historical contributions and continuous encouragement of C. Douglas Lewis, Je., and from my advisor Egon Vetheyen's steady supply of practical advice and faith in me. My father assisted with editing, my mother with typing of the manuscript, and both in more ways than I can say here. This study is dedicated to them.CONTENTS Abstract. Acknowledgments. Table of Contents Table of Illustrations. Introduction. I. The Florentine Cistercians and their Convent. II. Architectural Development of Cestello.. III. Chapels and Patrons at Cestello. IV. Art Works for Cestello. Catalog of Art Works. Stained Glass at Cestello ....- Applied Arts at Cestello..... Afterword. . Notes... Illustrations. Abbreviations Used for Cited Documents. Documents... Bibliography. Vita.oe TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS All illustrations of the church now called Santa Maria Maddalena dei Pazzi in Florence are labelled "Cestello." Photographs and drawings not otherwise credited are by the author. Figure ae om 10. ul. Cestello, facade; Cistercian plaque of gratitude to comendatory abbot Capranica Woodcut view of Florence between 1471 and 1482, in Staat- liche Museen, Berlin-Dahlem; detail of Cestello region, Gestello marked with arrow (photo: Alinari) Drawing of Cestello, c. 1457, from the Codice Rustic (fol. 19r), Seminario Maggiore di San Frediano in Cestello, Florence (photo: Gabinetto Fotografico, Soprintendenza alle Gallerie, Florence) Gestello, front door Gestello, south nave wall masonry Cestello, south nave wall masonzy, Looking east (photo: Soprintendenza ai Nonumenti, Flozence) Cestello, south nave wall masonry, Looking west (photo: Soprintendenza ai Nonumenti, Florence) Francesco da Sangallo, ground plan of Cestello convent, c. 1561, in Gabinetto dei Disegni (275A), Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence (photo: Gabinetto Fotografico, Soprin= tendenza alle Gallerie, Florence) R. Palagi and C, Rosselli, ground plan of Cestello church, 1963; dimensions in meters added based on original 1:50 scale drawing in Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, Florence (photo: Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, Florence) Ground plan as in figure 9, with chapel designations and foundation dates added (photo: Soprintendenza ai onumenti, Florence) Drawing of wooden corbel supporting roof timbers above Baroque ceiling at CestelloFigure 12. 13. 14 15. 16. Wa. 7b. 18. 19. 20. 2. 22. 23. 2. 25. 26. 2 28. 29. 30. Gestello, pietra serena side door frame Cestello, interior, view toward high altar Cestello, chapels 6L, 5L and GL (left to right) Gestello, chapel 5L (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Cestello, chapel 1R Cestello, molding of chapel 4L, with Tornabuoni device Reverse of medal of Giovanni Tornabuoni, Lorenzo's father (after Will /°1930_7, no. 1023) Gestello, arch molding of chapel 1L, detail Badia of Settimo, arch molding of cappella maggiore, detail Giorgio Vasari, view of Florence during the seige of 1530, in Palazzo Vecchio, Sala di Clenente VII, detail; Cestello marked with arrow (photo: Alinari) Cestello, portico Cestello, portico Abbey of Tre Fontane, outside Rome, engraved view (after Abbazia /°1967_7 ) Gestello, church facade portico, first capital to right of arch Casa Buonarotti, Florence, capital Cestello, front cloister, three easternmost capitals on north side Pazzi Chapel, Santa Croce, Florence, portico (photo: Brogi) Duomo, Civita Castellana, portico (photo: Dorothy Glass) Cestello, front cloister, church facade portico, arch Cestello, church fagade porticoFigure 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 4a. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. Gestello, inner cloister (now part of Liceo Michelangelo) with chapter house on left Cestello, front cloister, view toward west (street) side (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Suggested reconstruction of Cestello interior, c. 1505 Cestello, brick floor uncovered during restoration after 1966 flood (photo: Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, Florence) Cestello, chapel 2R, arch molding Cestello, chapel 6R, arch molding Giuliano da Sangallo, drawing from the "Taccuino Senese” (after Falb /°1902_7, pl. XI) Gestello, chapel 3R, arch molding (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Gestello, chapel 6L, arch molding Santa Maria delle Carceri, Prato, frieze (photo: Alinari) Cestello, chapel 1R, arch molding Palazzo Gondi, Florence, capital in courtyard (phot Brogi) Cestello, chapel 2L, capital and organ cantoria Giuliano da Sangallo, drawing from Codex Vaticano Barber- intano Latino 4424, fol, 1ly (after Wuelsen 7 110-7 Cestello, chapel 5L, arch molding Palazzo Gondi, Florence, camino, detail Plazzo Condi, Florence, pilaster in vestibule, detail Cestello, chapel 5L, capital Santo Spirito, Florence, sacristy capital (photo: Brogi)Figure 50. Sle 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59a. 59D. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. Cestello, chapel 3L, capital Medici Villa, Poggio a Caiano, vault of portico, detail Cestello, chapel 5R, capital (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Palazzo Antinori-Corsini, formerly Serristori, Florence, capital in courtyard Giuliano da Sangallo, drawing from Codex Vaticano Barber- iniano Latino 4424, fol. 9v (after Huelsen 7 1910./) Santo Spirito, Florence, vestibule of sacristy, detail of vault (photo: Alinari) Gestello, chapel 6L, Cavalcanti ma (photo: Tichard Lamoureux) Cestello, chapel 2L, Salviati stexma on chapel ceiling (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Cestello, chapel 3L, Riceialbani stemma (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Cestello, chapel 3R, Jacopi stemma on capital Cestello, chapel 3R, Jacopi steama on ceiling (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Cestello, chapel 3R, Serristori stemma Cestello, chapel 41, Tornabuoni steuma (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Cestello, chapel 4L, Albizzi steama Cestello, chapel 4L, Tornabuoni device on capital Cestello, burial vault under Pepi chapel (5R), entrance under altar (photo: Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, Florence) Cestello, burial vault under Pepi chapel (5R; photo: Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, Florence) Cestello, tomb plaque in Pepi chapel floor (5R)Figure 67. Map of Florence, showitg residences of major patrons of Cestello (from Touring Club Italiano, Guida d'Italia: Firenze e Dintorni, Milan, 1974) 68. A, Bigazzi, section drawing of Cestello chapels in 19663 chapels with original contents as of 1526 marked with asterisk (drawing: Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, Florence) 69. Badia of Settimo, stucco relief formerly on "Colombaione" , tower (destroyed; photo: Alinari) 70. Francesco Botticini (attributed), Madonna and Child in Glory with Saint Bernard and Saint Mary Magdalen, Paris, Musée du Louvre (photo: Service de documentation photographique, Reuninn des Musées Nationaux) Tla, Sandro Botticelli, Annunc: Uffizi (photo: Alinari) a, Florence, Galleria degli 71b. Botticelli Annunciation in original frame (after Horne /719087) 72. Pietro Perugino, Vision of Saint Bernard, Munich, Alte Pinakothek (photo: Alte Pinakothek’ 73. Domenico Chirlandaio, Visitation, Paris, Musee du Louvre (photo: Alinari) Tha. Cosimo Rosselli, Madonna and Child with Saints Peter, James and Infant John’ the Baptist, Florence, Galleria dell" Recadenta (photo: ADineri) 11 /71930_7, 74>. Salviati medal represeating Charity (after no. 1064) 75a. Lorenzo di Credi, Madonna and Child with Saints Julian and cholas, Paris, Musée du Louvre (photo: Alinari) 75b. Frame from chapel 3R, Cesteilo, now containing painting by A,or B. Boschi, Florence, Fortezza da Basso (photo: Alinari) 7Se. Lorenzo di Credi, left predella panel, with Jacopi stemna and Angel of the Annunciation, Florence, Fortezza da Basso (photo: Fortezza da Basso, Florence)Figure 75d. 75e. 76. 77. 78a. 78b. 79. 80. 81. 82, 83a. 83d. 3c. ogo Lorenzo di Credi, central predella panel with Man of Sorrows, Florence, Fortezza da Basso (photo: Gabinetto Fotografico, Soprintendenza alle Gallerie, Florence) Lorenzo di Credi, right predella panel with Virgin Annun- ciate, Florence, Fortezza da Basso (photo: Gabinetto Foto- grafico, Soprintendenza alle Gallerie, Florence) SebastianoMainardi (attributed), Saints Stephen, Peter and James, Florence, Galleria dell'Accademia (photo:Alinari) Saint Sebastian altarpiece, with side panels by Raffaellino del Garbo and statue attributed to Lionardo del Tasso, Florence, Fortezza da Basso (photo: Kunsthistorisches Institut, Florence) Ridolfo del Ghirlandaio, Nativity with Saints Francis, Joseph and Jerome, Leningrad, Hermitage (photo: Hermitage, Leningrad) Cestello, Pepi chapel (5L) with old frame, before 1966 (photo: Soprintendenza ai Monumenti, Florence) Domenico Puligo, Madonna and Child with Saints, Florence, Foretezza da Basso (photo: Alinari) Cosimo Rosselli, Coronation of the Virgin with Saints, Florence, Fortezza da Basso (photsi Alinart) Pietro Perugino, Crucifixion in Cestello chapter house (photo: Alinari} School of Perugino, Christ bends down from the Crucifix to embrace Saint Bernard, in Cestello chapter house (photo? Fortezza da Basso, Florence) Raffaellino del Garbo, Multiplication of Loaves and Fishes, central section, Florence in restoration, location unknown (photo: Flortezza da Basso, Florence) Raffaellino del Garbo, Multiplication of Loaves and Fishes, left section, Florence, in restoration, location unknown (photo: Fortezza da Basso, Florence) Raffaellino del Garbo, Multiplication of Loaves and Fishes right section, Florence, in restoration, Location unknown (photo: Fortézza da Basso, Florence)Figure Bla. 84>. 85a. 85b. 86. 87. 88a. 88b. 89. 90. ol. 92. Gestello, window of Tornabuoni chapel (4L) Cestello, window of Tornabuoni chapel (4L), detail Cestello, window of Pepi chapel (58) Cestello, window of Pepi chapel (5R), detail Cestello, window of Jacopi chapel (3) Cestello, window of Riccialbani chapel (31; photo: Bigi, Florence) Window with Angel of the Annunciation, National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., Widener Collection (after Kann £1907 7) Window with Virgin Annunciate, Netional Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., Widener Collection (after Kann /"1907_7) Badia of Settimo, cappella magziore with Annunciation roundels Liceo Michelangelo, Florence, probable setting of Widener Annunciatior. windows in the seventeenth century Cestello, organ (photo: Richard Lamoureux) Pietra serena pulpit, Museo Bardini, FlorenceINTRODUCTION Around the year 1480 a surge of architectural and artistic activity began at the church of the Cistercian order in Florence, Santa Maria Maddalena di Cestello (now Santa Maria Maddalena dei Pazzi), It started with relatively modest repairs on the church roof and the addition’of a cappella maggiore, which had been lacking. But over the next decades this activity went on to turn the Little rectangular Gothic building into a new Renais- sance church with a beautiful Ionic forecourt, and to fill the church and convent with works by most of the prominent painters in Late Quattrocento Florence. This study covers the period from the start of renovations at Cestello around 1480 to the completion of the last nave cha- pel in 1526, The first section concerns the Cistercian order in Florence, the foundation of Cestello, and the Cistercians' sub- sequent settlement there. This section will also deal with historical factors within both the order and the city of Florence which may have affected architectural and artistic activity at Cestello. In the second section the architectural development of the church will be examined in detail, with concentration on prac-tical and symbolic reasons for its character, on the nature of Giuliano da Sangallo's role in it, the question of Cistercian architecture as a type, and the building's status as a work of art. The third section, on chapels and patrons at Cestello, concerns factors which led Florentine patrons to endow chapels in general and at Cestello in particular. The fourth section will deal with art works produced for Cestello between 1480 and 1526, with an introductory essay, individual catalog entries on each altarpiece and fresco, and general discussions of stained glass and applied arts. Notes to these parts are grouped together following the con- clusion, except for notes on the art works and applied arts, which accompany the brief individual essays. Documents make up an appendix, although briefer documents and some essential excerpts are quoted ia the notes. Dates in the English text are in modern style, even if they appear in the documents in Florentine style (with the new year beginning on 25 March, the feast of the Annun- ciation). References given only by author and date appear in full in the bibliography. A list of abbreviations used for documents cited but not named in full is on page 238. The total study aims at a fuller recognition and understanding of an important artistic complex, and of certain practices and aspirations of the patronage which formed the background of Florentine religious art in the Renaissance.THE FLORENTINE CISTERCIANS AND THEIR CONVENT ‘The Florentine seventeenth-century Cistercian historian Ignazio Signorini begins his account of the renovation of Cestello!: 1480...With the church of Cestello threatening to fall into ruin due to old age, the monks had the idea of seeking a means to rebuild it... In 1480 the church was over 200 years old, and probably did need renovation, But the Cistercian monks had been using it since their settlement at Cestello in 1442 without undertaking a repair campaign. Te seems pertinent to ask whether other factors besides antiquity and Poor condition might have led to such a campaign around 1480 in particular. The beginning of restorations at Cestello does in fact appear closely associated with a time of recovery for the Florentine Cister- cians, in the midst of what is generally considered a period of decline for the Cistercian order. The order had seen its best days in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.> In the late fourteenth century it was suffering for a variety of reasons, including factors resulting from the Black Death and from the Great Schism, competi- tion from the younger mendicant orders, and, for the Florentine Cistercians, heavy city taxation. A further problem was the com- mendatory system. For monasteries, this entailed the appointment of abbots by an outside authority, a power which Pope Gregory XIa (1370-78) claimed exclusively for the papacy. Monks thus lost their ancient right to elect their ow leadership. Commendatory appointees, sonetines laymen, were assigned a monastery's revenues without responsibility for its spiritual well-being. Many monastic communities blaned their moral and financial decline directly on this practice, and by the early fifteenth century were seeking means to escape from it.” The Florentine Cistercians were one of the monastic communities im need of reform, The Cistercians had first settled near Florence as reformers themselves, when in 1236 2 band fron San Galgano near Siena took over a Vallonbrosan abbey, the Badia of Settimo, under orders from Pope Gregory IX, With this base about ten kilometers from the Porta San Frediano, near the Arno, they began to acquire more land, and were well supplied with it by the fourteenth century. But by 1436, as Vespasiano describes it, Settimo was in comenda under an abbot who had sold off its lands, reducing the once-great abbey to poverty and a population of two.? In that year, Pope Eugene IV undertook the reform of Settino. He appointed a conscientious comendatory, Cardinal Domeinco Capranica, who set about recovering Settimo's lost lands and increasing the monastic population, He accomplished the latter partly with an influx of Benedictine monks from the Florentine Badia, who became Cistercians under papal orders, One of these, Timoteo di Giaunino, was then made abbot of Settimo byaoe Capranica. It was Timoteo's proposal which led to the creation of the major Cistercian foundation of Cestello.® ‘Timoteo's avowed purposes were two--to provide a Florentine base for monks of Settimo who had business in the city, and simultaneously to reform a convent of Cistercian nuns in Plorence, Senta Maria Maddalena di Cestello.” The monks were staying in secular houses when they cane to towa, often resulting in scandal. ‘The nuns and their reputation were suffering from the poor condi- tion.of their convent (founded in 1257) and its lack of walls, which they could not afford to build. Timoteo, proposing "con un disegno rimediare a piu inconvenienti," asked the Pope to transfer the nuns of the Cestello convent to the monastery of San Donato a Torre (or in Polverosa) outside the city, and to make Cestello a monastery for the monks of Settimo, This was granted with a bull of 16 April 1442.8 ALL indications are that the Cistercians did not begin to build at Cestello immediately. They gradually recovered their strength and finencial resources until particular developments provided an impetus to build and decorate around 1480, both at Cestello and at the mother abbey of Settimo.” It would take a separate study to trace this recovery in the volumes of nego- tiations about their land holdings, which would have been their chief economic strength. !° But the general direction of their-6- Progress may be charted through a nunber of documents in the private Cistercian and official Diplomatic archives in the Archivio di Stato in Florence. Eugene IV helped at the outset by arranging for a major tax exemption from the Gommune of Fiorence, and by absolving the abbot of Settimo from the obligation to attend the order's General Chapter meetings at Cfteaux for three years, on the grounds that he was needed at home. Several churches and their lands, to which Settimo had old claims, were restored in the 1450's. By 1464 the monks of Settimo were considered suitable to reform the Benedictine monastery of San Bartolo di Ferrara, and in 1466 the Cistercian one of Chiaravalle di Milano. In 1474 Giuliano de! Medici proposed them as reformers for the Benedictine monastery of Sante Plora e Lucilla at arezzo,}! During the 1470's in particular the Cistercians of Settimo appear to have sought and obtained permission for certain important organizational changes. One was contained in a bull granted by Sixtus 1V, 29 November 1471, which provided for the election of future abbots of Settimo by the monks themselves, to be confirmed by the abbot or General Chapter rather than the Pope. This seems to be a quiet abolition, at least for Settimo, of the conmendatory system. 1? This aust have been an important moral victory for the Flor entine Cistercians. In his 1474 letter to Giuliano de Medici,a Allotti writes of the weakness of the Cistercian order as compared to the Benedictine Congregation of Santa Giustina of Padua (appar- ently unaware of Settimo's new right to elect its abbots): Gonoscho 1i Monaci di Cistello essere santissimi homini, € veramente bona, ¢ costumatissima famiglia; pure anno § lore Prelati a vita, e le loro Badie vachano in Corte; ita poi nel petto del Papa, se lui le vole dare ia commenda a qualche Cardinale, o vero vuole confermare quello, che fusse eletto per 1i Monaci di Cistello.13 The Florentine Cistercians were well aware of the strengths of the Congregation of Santa Giustina, which had arisen early in the fifteenth century as a means of resisting the commenda.!* 9 the late 1470's they moved slowly toward creation of a congregation of their own. A further impetus may have been the death of Abbot Pacifico by poisoning in August, 1477. On the evening of his death, the monks assembled at Settimo "to deal with creating an abbot speedily, so that the abbey would not suffer the disaster of returning into coumenda through such an abuse as the violent death of the abbot." The papal bull of 28 Noveuber 1477, which the Commune of Florence obtained for the Cistercians, made the office of abbot at Settimo annual rather than lifelong. Although the action was probably precipitated by the death of Pacifico, this was by now @ trend in Italian Cistercian houses, as well as a rule of the Congregation of Santa Giustina.}> Tt might have been at this time that the Cistercians began to plan their congregation, as further protection against a-~8- return to the commenda. A bull of Sixtus IV (28 June 1481) proclaimed the establishment of the Congregation of San Salva tore of Settimo. Patterned on thet of Santa Gtustina, the Congre= gation was to include the Badia of Settimo, its menbers Cestello and Buonsollazz0, and San Bartolomeo outside the walls of Ferrara: For various reasons the Congregation took effect only in 1484, with a bull of Tanocent vrrr.1® This Congregation, a forerunner of the Cistercian Congregation of San Bernardo in Ttalia which Alexander VI established in 1497, has yet to be studied in depth. As 2 covenent of national Cister- cian separation it was part of the order's long decline as an effective international organization.!” aut as an organ to meet the need for local reforms, which the General Chapter at Ctteaux could no longer accomplish, it may have strengthened some branches at least temporarily. Settino was a leader of this movement in Italy, and it was perhaps in preparation to take their place at the head of the Congregation that the Florentine Cistercians began to seek means of enbellishing end expanding Settimo and Cestello around 1430 in particular. In 1480 Ghirlandaio was a creditor for payment for three new al} expieces for Settimo, In 1481, roof repairs and the construction of a cappella maggiore began at Cestello. As these came to completion, a new cappella maggiore was begun at Settimo, and a small cloister behind it in 1486, The first of two new~9- dormitories was under way at Cestello in 1487, subsidized by the Abbot of Ferrara, himself a former monk of Settimo; and the decision on the Cistercians' part to seek patrons and add chapels at Cestello from 1488 on!® must have resulted from desires to embellish the church to make a distinguished center of the order; to increase the church space ‘for new members the Congregation might bring inj and to help finance expansion of the convent in general.!° Also in 1488, a Ferrarese monk named Antonio Panizzati gave public scriptural readings in Cestello--possibly part of a the Cistercian chureh.?° campaign to interest potential patrons i A list of Cistercian professions in Tuscany shows a sharp increase after 1485. This is surely related to the foundation of the Congregation, whatever other factors may have been involved. While it does not prove there was a specific increase in popula~ tion at Cestello, the nature of construction there, especially after 1485, was clearly designed to accommodate a larger population. 7! It is true that the first artistic innovations at Settimo and Cestello had begun before the Congcegation received even its first Papal approvai. But even if no direct relationship can be proved between the beginning of the Congregation and of renovations at this early stage, both seem to be part of a movement of renewal among the Florentine Cistercians, deriving ultimately from the effects of Eugene IV's reform.-10- Before discussing the exact nature of the renovations, it seems appropriate to consider the position of the Cistercians in Florence, which must have affected the response to their appeal for patrons. Beginning in the mid-thirteenth century Cistercians, sometimes alternating with other religious, had served the Republic as camarlinghi, limosinieri, and keepers of the communal seal. Cistercians (and Humiliates) were bursars for construction of the city walls in 1322, Beginning in the early Trecento Cistercians frequently held the office of camerariatus camere armarum, with an important role in electoral proceedings for communal offices, and imbursing functions. In 1330 the Signoria accorded the Badia of Settimo the recognition of assigning it a tomb in Santa Croce. By the fifteenth century Cistercian lay brothers held the offices of archivist, collectors of beans when the Signori voted, keepers of the keys to the Palazzo della Signoria, bursars of the camera delle armi, and custodians of the communal seal. The lay brothers elected to these last two posts in 1467 were also custodians of the palace sacristy. These two Lived and ate in the palace. In 1486 the Commune obtained a papal bull to replace the inept conversi with actual monks. ”* ‘Thus the Cistercians would have been prominently under the eyes of Florentine office holders (who included many of the Cestello patrons). They must also have gained prestige from their association with the important Florentine cult of Saint Bernard ofathe Clairvaux. This cult received a sharp upswing of official fostering beginning in 1444, soon after the reform of Cestello. Whether the saint was responsible for his order's importance in Florence or vice versa, some relationship is evident.”? The Aliottd letter quoted on page 7 documents both the Cistercians' high reputation in the 1470's and Medici interest im them. Signorini mentions the learned and saintly Cistercian Massimo Aretino, whose name appears slnost solely in Cistercian sources, but whose funeral in 1483 attracted "concorso di popolo grande" to Cestello. From about 1477 on, when the Cistercians were seeking contributors for the Cestello renovation, Lorenzo de' Medici's confessor was a Cistercian of Settimo named Guido, fa fact which vould certainly have enhanced the order's position during those years.24 In view of this, the absence of Medici patronage at Cestello is striking--particularly considering that around 1488 Lorenzo began to build a whole monastery at the behest of a monastic friend, At Cestello there is not so much as a Medici penny recorded enoag the nunerous donations around 1480 from citizens of prominent families to repair the church roof (doc. 2, fol. Ir). The best that can be said is that citizens might have responded more readily to the requests of an order which they knew had a member on intimate terms with Lorenzo.” Between 1490 and his death in 1492, however, there is reason to believe Lorenzo might at least have been behind the scenes in-12- the development of Cestello. The impetus would have been his interest, both as an urban planner and land speculator, in encouraging settlement on the considerable empty land in this section of the city (fig. 2)."° the region already had one important pilgrimage church and convent, Santissima Annunziata. Another one at Cestello, beautifully decorated and offering indulgences to visitors (as most of the altars in the new chapels at Cestello did), might have been a further attraction in the neighborhood. 77 A list of donors of candles to the Cisterciaus in 1491 (doc. 4, last page) includes Lorenzo di Piero de! Medici, his son Piero, and several close associates, as well as most of the Gestello chapel patrons. This means little without knowlege of where else Lorenzo made similar donations. But two of the most important patrons of Cestello were Jacopo di Giovanni Salviati, Lorenzo's son-in-law, and Lorenzo Tornabuoni, his cousin. Each came on the scene in 1490 or soon thereafter. Other Medici associates also approached Cestello after 1490 (Bernardo di Girolamo Morelli, Lorenzo di Recco Capponi, Galeazzo di Fran- cesco Sessetti, and Dionisio Pucci--the last two admittedly after Lorenzo's death in April, 1493.28 While evidence for Lorenzo's interest in the region near Cestello is concentrated chiefly eround 1489 and later, its first manifestation may be Bartolomeo Scala's settlement and constructionPai of a palace near the Porta Pinti in the mid-1470's. Scala's 1480 catasto declaration also mentions a "poderuzzo" near his house, bought from the "frati di cestello" on 13 March 1477.79 This last is of special interest, since a week later the Cister- cians obtained permission from the procurator general of the order, then from the Pope, to build and rent out houses on Land near Cestello which was in danger Propter vicinitatem nonnullorum civium florentinorum cupientium huiusmodi bona propter eorum potentian oécupares.e. While the threat was probably real in view of Lorenzo's behavior around 1490 with regard to Cistercian lend (see note 27), this permission may have helped to prepare a financial base for the 0 Tenovation of Cestello. Nevertheless, the case for Medici encouragement of Cestello patronage centers on 1490, and there is no evidence that Lorenzo initiated the activity which began well before then. The impetus for that seems to have come from the Cistercians themselves.~ 16 II, ARCHITECTURAL DEVELOPMENT OF CESTELLO ‘The church of Cestello has been called the first pure formu- lation of the Renaissance hall church. It has also been called "a simple and most banal adaptation” which required "...no archi- tect, but only a good mason," Such ccntradictory evaluations are puzzling. A judgment between them must rest on a systematic investigation of all extant visual and literary sources. One of the most important sources on Cestello is a rough drawing in the Codice Rustici (fol. 19r; ig. 3 here), datable c+ 1457.7 While imprecise about details, this sketch provides a general idea of Cestello's appearance before 1480. The drawing shows a simple, rectangular church building with an oculus above the rectangular door,® a walled courtyard in front, a cloister with arches om the left (north) side, a campanile in the northeast corner, and some small adjoining buildings at the southwest corner. Rustici is vague about the number of windows along the nave of the church, but the south wall today contains the walled-up remains of four tall ogival triconch windows 's church building was probably constructed (fig. 5, 6, 72.4 ThEse for the Benedictine pentitent nuns two centuries earlier, around 1257, and had been built a Little way back from a preexisting street.> ‘Two ground-plan drawings by Francesco da Sangallo in the Uffizi provide visual evidence on the state of Cestello within a century after the renovations. One (Uffizi 275A, fig. 8 here) shows the entire convent, the other (Uffizi 1533A) only the convent up to the third nave chapels of the church. Various other drawings exist, but are of relatively little use as evidence concerning the church in the fifteenth century.” The most recent and best ground plan of the church is the 1968 drawing by C. Rosselli and R. Pelegi at the Soprintendenza ai Monumenti in Florence (figs. 9 and 10). It reflects accurately the numerous irregularities in the chapel sizes and shapes. Supplementing the visual sources, considerable literary documentation has survived concerning the development of Cestello after 1480, particularly in Cistercian books of benefactors and, to a lesser extent, account books. Entries in these books, together with the visual sources and archaeological findings, allow us to distinguish four stages in the renovation of the church:ee 1) 1481-4: and the cappella maggiore; 2) 1488 ££.: addition of side chapels commencement and completion of roof repairs 3) 1491 ££, addition of the front cloister 4) 1498 ££.: addition of the choir chapel behind the cappella maggiore ‘The rest of the convent is discussed here only as it relates to problems concerning the church renovation (including the question of Cistercian architectural types). 1) Beginning of the Renovation The first stage of the Cestello renovation indicates no architectural plans beyond the addition of a cappella maggiore, anew (and higher) roof, and refurbishing of the Gothic nave walls. While planning and collections of loans and donations must tion work on Cestello have started earlier, the actual const began on 26 March 1481. Oa that second day of the Florentine new year, the cappella maggiore was founded with a solem cere- mony. No building accounts for this construction survive, but Signorini records that it was finished on 16 June 1483. The roof repairs, he says, were finished in the same year.® The masonry of the south wall indicates the the roof was raised about two meters above the Gothic height. The fifteenth century open-timber ceiling still exists above the Baroque soffito,-W- with carved corbels of Quattrocento style (fig. 11) which were evidently meant to be visible. Meanwhile, in 1482, the Gesuati had produced a new glass oculus for the facade. On 20 September 1483 Abbot Bernardo of Ferrara donated 30 ducats "to whitewash the church of Cestello when the new roof was up; which alms were a beginning to make it all white and beautiful." In addition, 14 florins from Ser Chiarissimo Fiaschi in April, 1484, went for "two glass windows im the church, which was most useful and necessary at that time Since the chapels were not begun, there was no need yet to make clerestory windows above them, so this donation must refer to new glass for two of the tall Gothic windows.” The nature of renovations up to 1484 suggests no nave chapels were even planned before that year. Cae doubts 30 florins would onaco for walls which were have been invested in a fine coat of meant to be pierced with chapels a short time later.!° similarly, it would make Little sense to invest money in new windows if there was already a plan to wall them up (as was done when the chapels were built). Finally, a marble sacrament tabernacle, donated on 20 Novenber 1484, was installed in a wall of the cappella maggiore, with angels and a baldachin painted around it by Domenico and Davide Ghirlandaio.- 18 - 2) Ghapets!? Two factors which may have made chapels particularly desir- able at Cestello occurred only after the end of 1484: the final approval of the Cistercian Congregation of San Bernardo, and a sharp increase in Cistercian professions in Tuscany. Cestello had at least two altars as early as 1323.!9 Cistercian choirs-- separate ones for monks, novices, lay brothers and the infirm-~ traditionally filled the nave. IE the number of monks, both to chant in the choir and to say mass at the altars, was to increase, there was a need for more choir space, more altars, and more room for the altars.' chapel patrons also aeant financial support and decoration, to make Cestello an appropriately splendid center of the Tuscan congregation. For these reasons, there was probably a campaign to recruit chapel founders efter the chapel rows were planned. By 9 Januaty 1488 a plan existed to build eight new chapels at Cestello.!> The first one, 6R, was founded some time after that date, and consecrated on 9 September 1488. The next, 1L, was not begun until 6 March rasg.t6 ‘These first two chapels, those of Saint Benedict and Saint Bernard, respectively, were the two most symbolically important, representing the Cistercians' two most revered monastic saints (who are portrayed flanking the Savior in a Gothic relief at Settimo, fig. 69). They were built at the east end of the church,-~19- nearest the cappella maggiore, on either side. It is not certain whether the two pietra serena doorways next to these chapels--one leading to the sacristy, the other to the cemetery (see fig. 8 and fig. 12) were completely new or in the positions of older doorways. The next two chapels, 2R and 3R, were founded 19 March and 28 March 1489, respectively--thus within three weeks of al? Adjoining each other, they left room for two more chapels between BR and the door on that side of the nave. With 6R already built, this indicates an expanded plan for at least five chapels on a side by March, 1489. ‘The sequence and locations in which the chapels were built after the first two are surprising (fiz. 10). Instead of building on down the nave toward the facade, the builders had jumped to the far end of the church and begun the second chapel on the right. The following four chapels were also built at that end of the church (3R, 18, 4t, 6t).'° The order suggests a deliberate effort to spare the eastern part of the church, at least for a time. This would have allowed the monks to concentrate their choir there and carry on the Liturgy in relative peace for a few years, after the disruption it would have suffered from the noise and activity of construction work on the first two chapels flanking the cappella maggiore Ze= 20 - The third chapel (2R), however, was not built right at the facade end, but evidently against the small building visible at the southwest corner of the church in the Rustici drawing (#ig. 3). Perhaps there was a plan to save this building for a while, but by 20 June 1490 it must have been decided to convert this structure into 1R, the Pugliese chapel. Of the five remaining nave chapels, 2L was begun in March, 1491, 4R in April, 1492, 3L probably in 1498, 5L in August, 1495, and 5R in March, 1500.70 The Cestello chapels have sail vaults, Like the aisles at Santo Spirito and San Lorenzo or the alter chapels in the Pazzi chapel and the old sacristy at Sam Lorenzo. In the back wall of each (except the renovated ones, 6R, 1R, 2R and IL) is a round- arched window, not all at precisely unifora height (see figs. 14, 15, 68). Delicate moldings outline the intersections of the interior walls and vaults. Cornices which ran around the inner walls at entablature level (fig. 78) were removed during the 1 All the chapels retain their richly restoration after 1966.” carved pietra seena entrance arches, on entablatures above the capitals of unfluted pilasters (not solid piers). 6R and 1L are distinguished by fluted entablatures (fig. 18). While the chapels all measure roughly five by five meters, a glance at the 1968 ground plan (fig. 9) shows considerable irregu- larity both in chapel sizes and thickness of dividing walls. These variations cannot be explained without more knowledge than isSia available of the earlier convent buildings. But the plan suggests that the adaptation involved considerable accommodation to preexisting structures.” Although multiple chapels were planned at the outset, it was apparently impossible to impose uniformity. The variety of arch moldings and pilaster capitals are a treasure trove of late Quattrocente decorative motifs. ‘They sug- gest that some latitude of choice regarding ornament was left up to the patrons, who were perhaps shown a variety of alternatives in pattern books.”> On the Tornabuoni chapel arch in particular, stemmi are actually carved into the capitals (figs. 61, 62), and a special Tornabuoni device, to be found in family medals and the fresco borders in the chapel at Santa Maria Novella, appears on the front molding and a capital (figs. L7a-b, 63). The moldings on IL--oak leaf clusters on the front, coffering on the underside-~ were probably selected by the Cistercians themselves. Although a common enough fifteenth-century combination,” these are the only moldings of their kind in Cestello (fig. 18). But they correspond to the motifs on the cappella maggiore arch at the Badia of Settino, Cestello's mother abbey (fig. 19).”° And they appear in Cestello only on 1L, the chapel of the great Cistercian Saint Bernard, in the honored position on the high altar's Litur- gical right. The Cestello Cistercians seem to be acknowledging their parent abbey in this symbolically important chapel. ‘The nature of the clerestory after the fifteenth-century renovation poses a problem, since no certain traces of any windows-22- of this period have survived at that level. 1 would suggest there were rectangular or round-arched windows about 2.25 meters high in the positions where the Baroque windows are now, at Least on the south side.”© This is based on standard Quattrocento forms, on the only positions possible based on the condition of the south wall masonry, and on a seventeenth-century document, a bill from a stonecutter in 1628. ‘The bill is for "two windows in the church made similar to the old ones, with a space 3-3/4 braccia high and 27 two braceia wide. The cited measurements, if they refer to the glazed areas of the windows, are too large for windows in the chapels. The bill could refer to two new windows at clerestory level on the north side (where the third space is occupied by the organ) to match three which would already have existed on the south, where the three Baroque windows are today.”® Perhaps in the Quattrocento the Cistercians had three windows made in the south elerestory, the source of the most light, but never arranged for the two on the north side after funds ran low. In this very practical manner, the stone box of Gothic Cestello was renovated into a tall chapel-lined hall (fig. 33). 3) The Front Cloistér A front cloister was already planed for Cestello by 26 March 1490. On that day the confraternity of Sant'Antonio obtained from the Cistercians a site between the nuns! convent of Santa Maria dei Candeli (south of Cestello) and "the cloister to be made in= 23 - the said monastery of Santa Maria Maddalena di Cestelio."?? on 22 February 1491, the Cistercians paid Giuliano and Antonio da Sangallo 15 florins (97 lire and 10 soldi) for a model.°° This unidentified model was probably for the front cloister. It was late to be delivering a model for the church building, whose renovation had begua in 1481 (or 1488 for the chapels), And it seems doubtful the model was only for some detail, considering its high price and the fact that it was the sole model considered important enough to be recorded in this particular account book.*! Finally, an account book of the Salviati, patrons of the front cloister, records a debt on 19 March 1491 (a month after the Cistereians paid for the model) for “construction of the cloister and e chapel in Cestello."*2 Thus the chronicler Giovanni Canbi was not mistaken when he placed _ the beginning of Cestello renovations in 1490 (Florentine style), since the most visible manifestation of these renovations would have been the front cloister. *? The decision to put a cloister in front of Cestello has been called a reflection of an ancient or early Christian atrium, and also a further emulation of Santissima Annunziata, which also had 34 a single nave lined with chapels, and a cloister in front.”* But this decision at Cestello began with a predetermined condition, a walled space between the church facade and the street (fig. 3) space which must have been created when the church was built around 1257, long before the Cistercians arrived. If the Cistercians were= hs to develop this space at all, they had the choice of building a cloister or tearing down the walls to make @ piazza, such as existed in front of the majority of Florentine churches. But the Cistercians were still to some extent a cloistered order, > making the latter alternative inappropriate. A cloister, on the other hand, could provide a stately entrance to the church, a work of the most modern architecture, and at the same time could symbolize the order's cloistered state even within the city. If the Cistercians did look to the Santissima Annunciata forecourt, it must have been with competitive intentions. The Servite church was not far from Cestello, and its special devo- ton was the cult of the Virgin, also a primary concern of the older Cistercian order, The Cisterciens probably intended to make their own front cloister not only vezy different, but also ce of such a structure much finer that this single other in Florence. The actual form of the Cestello cloister, a trabeated Tonic structure, must have been a Sangalo invention--although if the Cistercians had specifically wanted a medieval example of a Cistercian church with a trabeated Tonic portico, aduittedly very different in form, they could point to the church of Santi Vin- cenzo et Anastasio at the abbey of Tre Fontane, near Rome (fig. 23).°7 As Stegmann and Geyniiller first observed, Giuliano's model for the capitals is certainly the fine marble capital now at= 25 Casa Buonarotti.°® only one of the Cestello capitals copies it so far as the bead-and-reel ring around the neck; the others take the short-cut of uniform beads (figs. 24, 25, 26). One might speculate as to whether that capital was chose purely for its form, or also out of an interest in creating something based on Tusean rather than Roman antiquity. ?? The nearest formal prototype for the colonnades is also Tuscan--the portico of the Pazzi chapel (fig. 27).°9 tt is true that the triumphal arches which break the trabeation at the Cestello church fagade and convent entrance (fig. 21) are on piers rather than columns. This end the use of Tonic rather than Corinthian capitals put Cestello closer to a medieval proto ta Castellana (fig. 28). type, the portico of the Duomo at Ci But the total structure, with barre! vaults broken at the center by sail vaults, is much closer to the ?azzi chapel than to the Plain timber roof of the Civita Castellana portico. Cestello suggests rather a development of the Pazzi chapel motif in an Albertian direction. The decision for a basically trabeated cloister rather than a nore traditional one with arches may also Telate to the Albertian hierarchy which regards trabeated porti- coes as superior (in their inner cloister, not for public view (fig. 31_7, the Cistercians used arches). Thus the Sangallo de- sign seems intended partly to pronounce Cestello one of the “nobler tenples."? And the Cistercians might have been parti- cularly satisfied to have something that could be read as more distinguished than the arcuated front cloister at Santissima= 26 = Angunciata, The cloister is beautifully designed and proportioned, The FS ——LUrUr™—~<~rw™~s—C—™—C—C—C—CSC—C——C—CSC the entrance arch diameters equal two intercolunniations (plus the diameter of a column), 4? The pairs of piers forming L's (fig. 22, 32) at the cloister corners (as opposed to the usual colum in this position in Flor- entine cloisters) have been called "clearly derived from the antae Sr ————._—UU of the Pantheon. “4 The Albertian consonance would have called for at least one pier in each corner, vhere the trabeation ends and sail vaults begin, ‘Two piers may simply have been structural insurance, to support the intersection of two open barrel vaults @ situation which had not occurred in any previous Florentine cloister. The architrave with three fasces and a molding seems the standard Brunelleschian type, to be found on the Pantheon portico but also, for instance, in Santo spirito. “5 The cloister was probably originally intended to have Less the aspect of an antique or early Christian atrium than it does today.“ Francesco da Sangallo's drawing (fig. 8) indicates sail vaults (and thus arches) were planned in the centers of all four colonnades, not just at the church and street entrances. This probably reflects his father's original uncompleted plan, since it is unlikely that Francesco meant to change part of a colonnade that was already built. Tt should be noted that- 27 - the cloister was not finished until after 1966, and restoration then of the south side (which had been walled up) revealed that only the three columns nearest the church had been set up.47 So the only problematic side is the north, which an 1866 ground Plan (see note 7) shows as an unbroken colonnade. I would suggest the plan was changed end the north side completed as a continuous colonnade sometime after Francesco's drawing of c. 1561. The drawing would thus represent an as yet incomplete project, prob- ably based on an older one. “® Of the two chapels at the entrance to the cloister in Fran cesco's drawing, one was actually built--the right one, the del Giglio chapel--substantially before the drewing was made, The state of the other side, now part of the convent, does not indicate the second similar chapel ever existed. It was perhaps planned by 1529, however, when the heirs of Francesco Rutini (including the Cistercian monk Don Romolo) arranged to found a Rutini chapel of Saint Romulus "opposite the del Giglio chapel. ? The front cortile as originally planned, then would have enbodied cruciform imagery; it would also have accentuated a basic function of a cloister, communication between different parts of a convent (the south arch might have been chiefly for symmetry, since the only thing beyond it was the Confraternity of Sant'Antonio, separated from Cestello by a wall). In its references to Albertian-classical principles, other Florentine churches (the Pazzi chapel and Santissima Annunziata) and monastic functions, Giuliano's cloister shows up all the more- 28 - as a unique creation of its time and place. For the Florentine Cistercians it evidently represented more of a luxury than a neces- sity, for in 1542-4, subsidized by the Lonbard Cistercian abbey of Morimondo, they chose to complete the inner cloister rather than the entry one.°? 4) ‘The choir Chapel The last major architectural change in the Cestello church was the construction of a choir chapel behind the cappella maggiore in 1498, ‘There are no contenporary documents on its foundation, but only a general record by Signorini in the seventeenth century:°! 1498. In this year the choir of Cestello was built by breaking through the arch of the high altar wall to make it behind this altar. ‘The resulting structure is visible in the Francesco draving,”* and was slightly larger than the cappetia aaggiore, There is a debt to a glass artisan for "two windows with figures" for the choir in 1503, to be identified with the Widener Annunciation windows now in the National Galley of Art in Washington.” A donation of 10 florins in 1506 went for a "soffito” for this choir.®* the choir was renovated after 1590 with the addition of a “volta,” but all traces even of this have been wiped out by Caraelite renovations between 1669 and 1685.°° Tt is not certain whether this choir was begun only in 1498 because it was not considered necessary before then, or simply because funds became available only then.°° By 1498 there may have been new reasons for such a departure from Cistercian tra-- 29+ dition, reasons which had not existed before 1488. Cistercian choirs, as mentioned, customarily filled the church nave, and this must have been the case at Cestello be- fore the new choir chapel was built. The decision to abandon the nave for a position behind the high altar suggests that masses at the new side chapels and chanting in the choir had be~ gun to interfere with each other, and that laymen were beginning to attend the church in greater numbers, creating a need to re~ move the monks from them, >” There is no documentation on the latter point, but the new chapel as dram on Francesco's plan (fig. 8) is notably accessible from the sacristy without passing through the nave, where the laymen would have been. In addition, a scathing critique from the Gistercien visitor to Cestello and Settimo in 1505 (doc. 16) shows concern for sheltering the monks from laymen's eyes, even with the choir in its new removed po- sition: So that the Completorium may be chanted in Gestello as it is in other places according to the form of the order, the presiding officers are requested and ordered in the Lord Jesus to make the choir of Cestello, as quickly as possi- ble without serious difficulty, an appropriate place for the performance of the divine service in the house of the Lord. That place indeed seems rather a place of schism, and has the name of @ monster rather than a daughter, which has degenerated not only from the whole Cistercian order, but even from the monastery of Settimo, its own mother. In any case we order the ptior and bursar or treasurer of Cestello ... that within one month immediately following presentation of this, curtains must be provided to be placed to the right and left of the altar of the cappella maggiore, so that the monks in the choir may not be seen by laymen and disturbed.eo Obviously, there was not yet a tranezzo (a dividing sereen closing off the choir) at Cestello in 1505. But around 1524, the Cistercians seem to have gone in the opposite direction of the general sixteenth-century trend™® by adding one. A surviv- ing index for a lost account book of 1524 refers to "spese del tramezzo del coro di Cestello, 159;" and a donation of 50 ducats im 1526 was used to make "the enclosure between the choir and the chapel." Signs that the church was considered complete cone with pay- ments for a brick floor in October, 1499 (Fig. 34), and finally an indulgence from Julius II in 1504 for visitors and donors to the church of Cestello which “has recently been repaired."©° Figure 33 represents the church interior as it may have looked in that year. 5) A Gisterctan Church? one may well ask how far the new Cestello, with its side chapel rows, front cloister, and choir chapel, is a church based on Cistercian principles. The 1505 visitor's critique, although related specifically to the choir, carries a general sease of outrage which suggests the answer. ‘The array of art works which filled Cestello, far outstripping many churches of orders with less "iconophobic" traditions, also shows how far the Florentine Cistericians had come from their origins.°! 1£ the Florentine Cistereians ever considered adapting their church into the most characteristic medieval Cistercian plan--a cruci~-31- form church with a square apse and rectangular chapels in the transept®*--they abandoned the idea early on. The front cloister, as noted, is not a Cistercian feature, and the re- moval of the choir to a separate chapel is a sharp break with medieval tradition. ‘The arrangement of the convent, on the other hand, con- forms in many ways with Cistercien practice, especially in the positions of the refectory, sacristy, chapter house, cemetery (fig. 8), and the construction of a special chapel for women at the entrance. The chapter house was consecrated as a cemetery for abbots, another tradition. ce A notable innovation is the large "liberia", which is interestingly in the same position in relation to the church and front cloister as the library at Santissima Annunziata. still, the plea as a whole reflects an awareness of Cistercian practice and a willingness to adhere to it. But the church, the structure most representative of interaction between the monks and the surrounding society, is far less a creation of Cistercian tradition than a local embodi ment of Florentine late Quattrocento motifs.°> 6) The Case for Giuliano da Sangallo It remains to evaluate Cestello as an architectural creation, and specifically to consider what evidence exists for identify- ing Giuliano da Sangallo as its designer, as distinct from his undoubted design of the front doister sometime after the church renovation had begua.°° the only other proposed "architect", the= 326 ménk Antonio di Domenico Brilli who "soprastava alla fabrica", was surely the organizer and administrator of the project rather than the designer.” There are no documents connecting Giuliano with work at Cestello other than the one for the model in 1491, and no draw- ings of his which can be related specifically to Cestello, °° The plans and articulation (pilaster and architrave systems) of other ecclesiastical buildings by Giuliano are of little help. Santa Maria delle Carceri and the Santo Spitito sacristy are not only centralized plans, but new buildings designed from the ground up, Cestello wes above all an adaptation, and carried out a little at a time. The two drawings in the Uffizi usually con- sidered to represent Giuliano's lost Saa Gallo convent church (1574A and 1573A) are neither of definite authorship nor defin- itely the San Gallo church, ©? Any stylistic evidence for Giuliano's presence at Cestello at the 1481 stage was lost with the renovation of the cappella maggiore in the seventeenth century. There is only some circum- stantial evidence: in the early 1480's Giuliano was working on roof alterations at Santissima Annunziata”? The Cistercians, who also needed work done on their roof, might well have sought out an architect who was proving his expertise at precisely this task in a church not far away. Beginning in 1488, however, there is considerable evidence for Giuliano's activity at Cestello. To begin with, the first- 33 - chapel founder, Giovanni d'Agnolo Bardi, was an old employer of his, even if only for a picture frame (1485).’! Bardi must surely have discussed the church plan, and perhaps the architect, with the monks, since his will indicates he knew how many chapels were originally intended (doc. 18). ‘The evidence for Giuliano which has been most widely noted, and rightly so, is the sculptural ornament on the chapel entrance arches.’ There is little point in trying to distinguish a par- ticular sculptor's hand in this situation, but the motifs and treatment in general certainly speak for Giuliano's direction.’? The grotteschi motifs on two of the first three chapels built (6R and 2R) are less dense than anything in drawings by Giuliano (fig. 35, 36,37) or the Sassetti tombs in Santa Trinita, But they certainly testify to an artist icterested in antique orna~ ment.7# Carved vine grotteschi in such a position on an arch are unusual, but one example near Cestello is the arch underside of the oratory adjoining the shrine of the miraculous image at Santissima Anounziata, Giuliano end his associates had made a model of this structure in 1483.79 ‘The fruit festoons on the moldings of other chapels founded from 1489-91 (3R, 1R, 6L, 2L) show fine high relief and loving detail in the fruit, vases and crinkling ribbons. They may be compared with some of the best capitals in the Gondi palace courtyard (fig. 38, 39, 41, 42)2° ‘The similarity with della- he Robbia work recails Marchini's suggestion that Giuliano actually participated in production of the fine festoons for the frieze at Santa Maria delle Carceri, for which Andrea della Robbia was paid in 1491-2 (fig. 40).77 Vine motifs on some capitals of 2L recall Giuliano's draw ing of the frieze from the "Volte delie Givette" in the Baths of Trajan (fig. 43, 44). ‘The latest carvingsare some of the finest. On 5R (1495) are vines and jewels in remarkable high relief, worthy of the Gondi camino and vestibule (fig. 45, 46, 47). Delicate vase and dolphin capitals on this arch are also comparable to Gondi stone- work (fig, 48). One recalls Stegmann ond Geyniiller's observation that Giuliano's handling of details suggests less an architect than a goldsmith.’® the grotesque face cepitals on 3R (the Riceial~ bani chapel, probably c. 1498; see doc. 7, fols. 132 and exci) are a small-scale version of the ones in the Santo Spirito sac- risty, even including acorns in oak leaf clusters above the heads (£ig. 49, 50). The faces also suggest motifs from the vestibule at Poggio a Caiano (fig. 51). The dolphin, shell and trident capitals on the last chapel begun (5R, 1500) are admittedly by this time a commonplace motif (fig. 52, 53), but relate to Giulieno's drawings after the antique and a motif used in the vestibule of the Santo Spirito sacristy’? (fig. 54, 55). In addition to the earliest sculptures, the name of a cer- tain workman on the Cestello project from September, 1489 onward- 35 - betokens Giulieno's presence before the front cloister was begun. One Zenobi di Sandro de Lastricato was paid for the foundations of the sacristy chapel at Cestello in 14898 his same Zancbi was also involved in the foundations of Santa Maria delle Carceri, the sacristy of Santo Spirito, and the strozei palace.®! Finally, the original eight-chapel plan for Gestello, or rather its replacement, argues for Giuliano. This plan was perhaps intended to include a transept, and aay have resembled the eight- chapel plan of the Badia at Fiesole. Ta that case, its abandon- ment would indeed represent the invention of a hall church type, even if only for the practical purpose of making room for more chapels. If the simpler (and probably cheaper) expedient of a chapel-Lined hall was planned from the beginning, the decision for six chapels instead of four on 2 side represents a much more effective organization of the nave walls. Four chapels instead of six would either have been disproportionately large for the long narrow nave, or else clustered at one end of the church with a large white section at the other, Whatever form the eight- chapel solution might have taken, its abandonment suggests the participation of a mind with a superior sense of design. ‘The governing sense of design becomes the more impressive with the realization that all the chapel entrance arches are within three centimeters of the same width (3.80 m.), masking the irregular sizes of the chapels which must have been unavoid- able. This module is almost exactly one-third of the nave width= 36 = (11.60 m,), and reflects the preexisting ratio, just under 1:3, of that width to the nave length (37.70 m.) The designer of Cestello was forced to work within the limits imposed by given structures, en ongoing Liturgical cult, and an intermittent con- struction process. Yet he not only created an impression of regularity and order, but seems also, as far as possible, to have worked a system of simple numerical relationships into the reno- vated church.®? ‘Thus Giuliano da Sangallo's presence at Cestello after 1488 seems clearly demonstrable, even if not documented. And his achievement at Cestello seems less the conscious formulation of @ new church type than the adaptation of preexisting structures, in response to particular functions and needs, into a remarkably beautiful and harmonious building.-37- TIL. CHAPELS AND PATRONS AT CESTELLO The private chapel--an architectural space set apart for the altar of a particular individual or corporate patron--became a enth-century Florence. remarkably widespread phenomenon in if! A rough count of chapel spaces in the group of churches where most were constructed from the late Trecento to c. 1500--Santa Trinita, San Lorenzo, the Badia a Fiesole, Santo Spirito, Santissima Annun- ziata, Santissimi Apostoli, San Salvatore al Monte, Cestello, San Domenico a Fiesole, the San Gallo monastery-~comes to about 200, most of them dating from the second half of the fifteenth century. And this count does not include the stone tabernacles set up for private altars along the walls of churches like Ognissanti and Sant'Ambrogio; the new Quattrocento chapel decorations in older churches like Santa Maria Novella or San Miniato al Monte; sac~ risties and chapter houses built as private chapels, as at San Lorenzo and the Pazzi chapel at Santa Croce; or chapels built in the countryside, such as the Pugliese chapel at Campora which once housed Filippino Lippi's Vision of Saint Bernard, now in the Badia in Florence. These chapels, which played such an important part in Flor- entine religious art and architecture, represent a social and religious phenomenon worthy of its own study. In relation~ 38 ~ to late Quattrocento art, chapel patronage is usually discussed with reference to three grand-scale undertakings of the 1480's-- the Tornabuoni, Sassetti and Strozzi chapels. Each of these Provided 2 major fresco cycle for a chapel at the apse end of a Gothic church; the last two included splendid tombs for their Patrons, In Francesco Sassetti's case the chapel represented a vow to his patron saint which he took so seriously that he was willing to give up his rights to the cappella maggiore of the Dominican church of Santa Maria Novella in order to be able to dedicate his commission to Saint Francis, even if in a less pres- tigious place.” For the chapels at Cestello, the individual patrons! con- tributions and the artistic results are less dramatic. But for that very reason, Cestello provides a broader and perhaps more representative case study. The 16 chapels added from 1480 to 1526 are well documented. The patrons are still sufficiently identifiable to allow fruitful speculation on their interest in chapels and in Cestello. 1) The Cistercian Initiative The naia impetus for chapel building seems to have come after 1484 with the creation of the Congregation of Saint Bernard, and an increase in Cistercian professions which brought the need for more nave space and room for more monks to celebrate mass. In addition, the Cistercians must have seen chapels as a means of~39- Providing Cestello with decoration appropriate to its important Position in the Congregation, as Florentine daughter of the founding abbey of Settimo. They had before them the recent ex- ample of Santo Spirito, where patrons were acquiring and deco- rating chapels in the mid-1480's.? A third reason why the monks would want chapels is the obvi- ous economic one, Patrons not only paid for construction of cha- pels, but provided them with endowments to have prayers offered during their lifetimes, and legacies for more prayers after their deaths. Their families might continue these benefactions . Three chapel patrons, the Nasi brothers and Benedetto Guardi, also made building loans to the Cistercians in the early 1490's, after they had founded chapels.” tn addition, as the Cistercian documents show, patrons were generous with such liturgical necessities as vestments, lamp oil and candle wax. Besides this, the indulgen- ces attached to most of the altars would attract visitors--and potential donors--to the church. Yet it is interesting thet the Cistercians seem to have ex- Ploited the initial financial possibilities much less than the Augustinians of Santo Spirito. Chapel prices at Santo Spirito ranged froa 150 to 500 florins, during the same period when Lar- ger chapels at Cestello were going for 50 to 70 florins.” tt is true that the Santo Spirito prices vere probably supporting construction of the whole church. Perhaps also no one was will= 40 - ing to pay as much for a chapel at Cestello. Still, the great discrepancy suggests the Cistercians initially may have been more interested in having the chapels built than in deriving income from thea. In any case, the Cistercians seem from the beginning to have gone actively in search of patrons. The first evidence of this is the list of contributors for the roof repairs around 1480.° ‘The names represent some of the most prominent families in Florence, and are associated with various parts of the city (few can be securely traced in detail, as almost no patronymics are provided). Thus it is pleinly more than a case of a community coming to support its church. If some common spiritual current bound these 31 men together, there is no way to trace it precise- ly, although perhaps some had been among the youths whom Ves- Pasiano took to the Badia of Settimo to visit Ser Filippo da Vertine (Section I,note 9). The only obvious implication is that the Cistercians, perhaps represented by Don Antonio Brilli, ap- pealed to a long list of the richest families in Florence, and these were the men who responded. For the chapels, the best evidence of a search for patrons is in the will of Giovanni d'Agnolo Bardi (9 January 1488), me of the first chapel founder. He left 50 florins to build the eight chapels ordained for this convent", and asked for his arms to be placed in it as "an example to other benefactors."”aio The next patrons did not come forth until more than a year after the mention of these eight proposed chapels. This, along with the concern for an example, suggests that the Cistercians planned the chapel rows before they had a commitment for each chapel, but in the confidence that they could find patrons. The public scriptural readings in 1488 (see page 9) may have been initiated partly to draw potential patrons to Cestello. 2) The Patrons: Religious Motivations ‘The patzons themselves and their interests remain to be examined here. Most of those discussed below will be founders or later owners of nave chapels. Other important patrons included are Nicold and Bernardo del Barbigia, founders of the cappella maggiore; Dionisio i Puccio Pucci, who paid for the Perugino fresco in the chapter houses some founders of other chapels in the convent (del Giglio, Sofferoni, Pasqualini); the confraternity of Sant! Antonio, which built a meeting-place at Cestello; a few would-be chapel owners who never followed through (Bernardo di Girolamo Morelli, Lorenzo di Recco Capponi, Galeazzo di Francesco Sassetti) and a few donors of other items (Antonio Dei for the sacrament tabernacle, Giovanni di Nofri del Caccia for the oculus and an altarpiece). Whatever importance one assigns to piety among other more worldly motives, the patron's religious faith and his desire for spiritual benefits, especially in the hereafter, was an evident motivation of chapel founders.~ 42 - Almost all of Brilli's chapel patronage records (and those for other donations) in doc. 2 contain some version of the phrase "siano tenuti a pregare Dio per lui chone nostro benefattore." The prayers often extended to ancestors ("sul Passati") and loved ones ("le sue"). The records sometimes list particular days on which masses or offices were to be said for the donor's soul or in commemoration of his dead (the Bardi, Pepi and Tornabuomi chapel documents are most detailed on these points). No document tells whether a patron sonetimes came to his chapel to pray privately, or whether he and his family came there to attend masses other than funeral services. But many Patrons furnished their chapels with beaches ("panche"), pre- sumably for their own use. 3) Display of Arms The patrons whose generosity benefited churches made sure that whatever they actually provided would reflect due honor on their name. The fullest (or at least the best documented) con- tents for a chapel at Cestello in thefifteenth century came from Korenzo di Giovanni Tornabuoni, who furnished an altarpiece by Domenico Ghitlandaio, a predella (probably meaning sub-plat form) for the altar, beaches with spalliere, two white candlesticks and two more of iron to place oa the altar, and a stained glass win- dowas well as a chasuble, dalmatic and tunic, a decorated altar= 43- frontal, and a cope of enbroidered damask.° Of the other cha- pel patrons, most provided altarpieces: the Nasi one by Peru- gino, Guardi a Botticelli, Mascalzoni a Lorenzo ai Credi, Boni one attributed to Sebastiano Mainardi, the Salviati a Cosimo Rosselli, Pepi a Ridolfo del Ghirlandaio, the del Giglio a Cosimo Rosselli, the da Romena a Puligo, and the Riccialbant a tabernacle with a wooden statue of Saint Scbastian and wings painted by Raffaelino del Garbo. Four chepel owners supplied no recorded altarpieces -- Bardi, Pugliese, Cavaleanti and Bartolini, But even these took care to display their arms prominently in their chapels (though nove survive for Bartolini). Giovanni de! Bardi's will specified thet the testator's "insignia and arms in stone" should be in his chapel, and the Rosselli 2 elso in the chapel sepoltuario of 1657 indicates they we window.? Pugliese donated a chasuble with his arms and those of his wife.!° cavaleanti's carved stone stemma may still be seen on his chapel arch and ia the ceiling (fig. 56). As for the others, Brilli records the Nasi built a chapel “with their arms and toab.*'! Ams survive also on the arches and/or ceil- ings of the Pepi, Salviati and Riccialbani chapels (figs. 57, 58 and 78b); on the frames of the Guardi, del Giglio and da Romena paintings, and the Jacopi predella (fig. 75c, photographed during a restoration after 1966; this would have been added to Mascalzoni's painting, which Jacopi acquired); in the Jacopi, Riccialbani and Tornabuoni and Pepi windows (figs. 84, 85, 86ee 87); attached to the capitals of the Jacopi chapel (figs. 59 and 60; his arms and those of his wife, Costanza d'Avetardo Serristori); and actually carved into the capitals of the Tornabuoni chapel (figs. 61 and 62), which also has a special Tornabuoni device, a three-part triangle (figs. 17a-b and 63), on the front arch and the right hand inner capital.!? the Barbigia arms were on the arch and ceiling of the cappella maggiore.!> small stenmi beneath the fresco in the chapter house, donated by the Pucci, have been painted out. Brilli tells how in 1482 Giovanni di Nofri del Caccia placed his ars on the inner facade of the church after paying to whitewash it, ‘without any obligation but only to do this good for the said church", and these atms were also in the glass oculus which del Caccia provided for the same wall.! hese multiple small- scale examples, Like the bright stemmi on the exterior of Santo Spirito and Francesco Sassetti's concera for his chapel as representing "the honor of our house and the sign of our antiquity," bear witness to the recompense of worldly fame which Florentine patroas expected for their generosity.!> ‘The monk Brilli recognized this when he wrote (doc. 2, fol. i) that he was r: ‘ing the names of Cestello benefactors partly "in order that due honor aay be paid them in this present life. ‘The chapel prominently marked with the stemni of the Torna~- 45 = buoni and Albizzi families exemplifies another potential pur- Pose of a chapel: a memorial for the dead. The memorial func- tion must be understood as distinct from that of a tomb chapel, since in this case neither the person commemorated nor the donor was buried at Cestello, Lorenzo Tornabuoni requested a chapel at Gestello on 8 August 1490. His young wife Giovanna di Maso degli Albizei had died by 7 october 1488. Nevertheless, their two stemmi are shown interlocked in the chapel window (fig. 84b), and are the only arms in Cestello actually carved into the pi- laster capitals, not simply applied (figs. 61, 62). A hundred years of memorial masses for Giovanna's soul began in this chapel on 25 December 1490. The altarpiece e=rived on 21 July 1491, a few months before Lorenzo collected the dowry of his second wife, Ginevra Gianfigliazei.! In one of the few chapels at Cestello whose original patron did intend it for a tomb, the first death and burial seems to have stimulated an increase in donations. Francesco di Chirico Pepi ordered this chapel (the fifth on the right) built on 28 March 1500. But he made no recorded donations to it except some altar cloths until his son Buonaccorso died and was buried there @9 October 1510). After this he began sending an annual barrel of oil for an eternal lamp (30 November 1510), donated a silver crucifix reliquary to Cestello (20 July 1511) and an assortment of Liturgical vestments and candlesticks to his chapel (22 July 1511). The altarpiece was probably begun shortly before 18 oct~ ober 1512.175rG4 The two detailed wills which were prepared for Pepi (a lawyer) give considerable information oa burial practices in the early sixteenth century, which probably reflect those of the late Quattrocento. Most interesting is that the tomb chan- ber under the chapel was not patt of the original chapel archi- tecture. It was not yet made by 1595 ("ad hue sepultura subtus dictam cappellam non est cavata ...") or possibly even by 1512. Pepi instructed in 1505 that if it was not ready by his death, his body was to be placed in a "capsa" in the chapel near the altar, and walled up ("aurata") there until the tomb chamber was ready to receive it; then it should be placed in that chamber in the same"capsa" (the 1512 will indicates this was done with his son, who had died in 1510), An entrance ("ingressus et hostiun') to the sepulchre was to be in the convent cemetery behind the chapel, and the alter wall had been pierced by 1505 to show where this entrance should be ("in quo est ruptura iam facta pro signo dicti ingressus"), The 1512 will stipulated that after the burial of Buonaccorso and Francesco, the entrance was to be sealed up (Glaudi murandd), and only his wife Piera and his daughter Giuditta, if she wished, could subsequently be buried there. ‘The chamber under the chapel was opened after the 1966 flood (figs. 64, 65). According to Padre Domenico Restante, prior of Santa Maria Maddalena dei Pazzi, a passage with a narrow stair~ case descended at the back of the chapel, and was sealed in the chapel floor by a rectangular stone under the altar. A man couldois descend here and receive a coffin passed through the round open- ing in the center of the chapel floor, which is still sealed with a stone inscribed FRACISVS PEPIVS/ IVR CON: HOC SA/ CEL: BT SEP: SIBI V/ XORI LIB. ISQ POS/ (fig. 66), In the low vaulted chauber under the chapel, the coffins rested on plat- forms less than a meter high along the valls. The only inscriptions in this room were the black crosses Painted on the walls (fig. 64, 65). There was no access except through the chapel floor (note 18). During restoration the platforms were raised, the back pas sage and staircase eliminated, and new accesses to the vault were made in two walls. 5) Non-funeral Chapels Pepi's case is exceptional. A survey of Cestello chapel founders reveals the interesting fact that very few of them wanted to be buried there. Giovanni and Agnolo Bardi wanted tombs in Santo Spirito, Francesco del Pugliese wanted a tomb in his family chapel in the Carmine, Cavalcanti one among his brothers in Santo Stefano, and Benedetto Guardi one in Santa Croce.1? the Tornabuoni were buried in Santa Marta Novella. «At least two of the Salviati were buvied at Santa Croce. I could find no will for Bartolini. The wishes of Filippo Mascalzoni and Stefano Boni must remain uncertain, since they parted with their Cestello chapels before they died. But Stefano's son, Jacopo, was buried at Santa Maria Novella on 22 Decenber 1499, while Stefano still owned a chapel at Cestello, so that chapel= 48 - was probably not intended for tonbs.”° Even Giovanni di Bernardo Jacopi, who acquired Mascalzoni's chapel in 1503, still wanted to be buried in Santa Croce as of 1506 (his 1513 will, however, called for burial at Cestello). Paolo di Ser Giovanni da Romena, who bought the former Boni chapel in 1525 to make a tomb for his brother Bernardo, had orig- inally wanted that tomb to be in the Duomo, Only Francesco Pepi, Marietta di Tomaso del Giglio (doc. 22) and Jacopo Sofferoni (doc. 20) clearly meant to be buried at Cestello, and Sofferoni as of 1492 had still wanted burial in bis parish church, Sant! Anbrogio.”? In general, the Cestello chapels seem to have resulted from other motives than the desire for 2 toub at the Cistercian church. While the patrons were willing to aid the Cistercians and display their generosity at Cestel!o, most preferred to rest among their ancestors or in churches where they had older tradi~ tions of patronage. At least five--the Nasi brothers, Benedetto Guardi, Francesco del Pugliese aad Filippo Cavalcanti--did not even mention Cestello in their wills (see notes 19, 24, 26 and 27 for the will citations). 6) Broader Patronage In several cases, a chapel at Cestello represented only a part of a euch broader pattern of patronage by a particular person or his descendants, whose donations marked their presence through- out Florence and sometimes elsewhere. Giovanai d'Agnolo Bardi, the first chapel founder at Cestello, had acquired a chapel at