The Pantheon: From Antiquity to the Present

by Unknown

  Universal Pantheon versus S. Maria ad martyres

  In one detail in particular, we can identify firm evidence in Pannini’s views of the beginning of a new story that, just few decades later, was to give to the Pantheon a new function and influence. In all of his paintings of the interior of the rotunda, a pair of oval niches appear on the walls alongside each aedicule, and almost all of them are represented as empty (Fig. 11.1). When the restoration of the lower part of the rotunda was completed, all of the tombs of the artists who, following Raphael’s example, had chosen to be buried there were removed. Uniform niches were then commissioned by Cardinal Del Giudice in order to reinstall these funerary memorials and to renew interest in this practice. In 1713, Cardinal Ottoboni, protector of the Confraternity of Saint Joseph in the Holy Land, was the first to place a bust unrelated to a tomb in one of these niches, to honor the memory of the musician Arcangelo Corelli.56 Other busts were added in the following years.

  Whether or not the empty niches testify to the difficulties of completing the program in the succeeding decades is unknown. Their later use was eventually encouraged in a completely different spirit, heralding a new role for the entire Pantheon. Around the 1780s, the Spanish diplomat Nicolas de Azára, the French art critic Jean-Baptiste Seroux D’Agincourt, and the German agent Johannes Friederich Raffenstein, all living then in Rome and in close contact with artists, each placed in the Pantheon a bust of his most famous countryman who had drawn inspiration from the city. The painters Anton Mengs and Nicolas Poussin and the art critic Johannes Joachim Winckelmann were thus honored. None of them was buried there, nor were they connected to the church of Santa Maria ad martyres or to any of its confraternities. These new busts – soon to be joined by a host of similar homages to better- and lesser-known painters, sculptors, architects, and literati – were instead associated with Raphael’s tomb, and, as a group, they celebrated something more consequential than their individual nationalities, trumpeting Rome’s importance as the artistic capital of the world. Although in existence for only a brief period – in 1820 the busts were transferred elsewhere57 – the Pantheon of artists for a time seemed almost to supplant the significance of both the ancient and Christian heritage of the building, becoming the model for the many successive pantheons of Romanticism. The Temple des Grands Hommes in Paris, the Walhalla in Regensburg, and the tombs in S. Croce in Florence are but some of the examples of the Pantheon’s universal legacy.

  Translation of Chapter Eleven by Oona Smith; with thanks to Ann Giletti and Louise Rice for their help in revising the text. All issues presented here are extensively documented in Susanna Pasquali, Il Pantheon: architettura e antiquaria nel Settecento a Roma, Modena 1996; Pasquali, “From the Pantheon of Artists to the Pantheon of Illustrious Men: Raphael’s Tomb and Its Legacy,” in Pantheon: Transformation of a Monumental Idea, ed. Richard Wrigley and Matthew Craske, Aldershot 2004, pp. 35–56; Pasquali, “L’attico del Pantheon. Nuovi documenti sui marmi e sulla controversa ricostruzione del 1757,” in Bollettino d’arte 85, 2008, pp. 111–122.

  1 For the variations see Ferdinando Arisi, Gian Paolo Panini e i fasti della Roma del ’700, Rome 1986; Michael Kiene, ed., Pannini (Exposition-dossier du département des Peintures, no. 41, Musée du Louvre, 15 October 1992–15 February 1993), exh. cat., Paris 1992. A comprehensive study of all Pannini’s views of the interior of the Pantheon has yet to be done; the view once in Marble Hill House, Twickenham, is dated 1734.

  2 S. Serlio, Il terzo libro dell’architettura, Venice 1540; A. Palladio, I quattro libri dell’architettura, Venice 1570, Book IV; Roland Fréart de Chambray, Parallèle de l’architecture antique et de la moderne, Paris 1650.

  3 Antoine B. Desgodetz, Les édifices antiques de Rome dessinés et mesurés très exactement, Paris 1682; on Desgodetz’s book: Wolfgang Herrmann, “Antoine Desgodetz and the Académie Royale d’Architecture,” Art Bulletin 40, 1958, pp. 23–53.

  4 Carlo Fontana, Templum Vaticanum et ipsius origo. Cum aedificiis maxime cospiquis antiquitus & recens ibidem constitutis …, Book 7, Rome 1694, pp. 454–474.

  5 Ludovicus Demontiosus [L. de Montjosieu], Romae Gallus Hospes, ubi multa antiquorum monimenta explicantur pars pristinae formae restituuntur …, Rome 1585; Fontana’s debt to Demontiosus is discussed in Pasquali 1996a, pp. 12–14.

  6 Simon Ditchfield, “Leggere e vedere Roma come icona culturale (1500–1800 circa),” in Storia d’Italia. Annali 16, 2000, pp. 33–73; pp. 33–55.

  7 In eighteenth-century Rome, an entire book was dedicated to this topic: G. Marangoni, Delle cose gentilesche e profane trasportate ad uso e a ornamento delle Chiese, Rome 1744.

  8 “Prospetto interno ed esterno dell’antico tempio romano,” drawing by G. T. Vergelli, etching by P. P. Girelli, Rome 1692, with a second edition in 1773 (P. Arrigoni and A. Bertarelli, Piante e vedute di Roma e del Lazio nella raccolta delle stampe e dei disegni Castello Sforzesco, Milan 1939, no. 2574).

  9 Richard Krautheimer, The Rome of Alexander VII, 1655–1667, Princeton 1985, pp. 104–109; Tod A. Marder, “Bernini and Alexander VII: Criticism and Praise of the Pantheon in the Seventeenth Century,” Art Bulletin 71, no. 4, 1989, pp. 628–645; Marder, “Alexander VII: Bernini and the Urban Setting of the Pantheon in the Seventeenth Century,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 50, 1991, pp. 273–292.

  10 Giovanni Pietro Bellori, Vite di Guido Reni, Andrea Sacchi e Carlo Maratti, ed. Marcello Piacentini, Rome 1942, p. 124. Raphael’s bust was commissioned to the sculptor Pietro Paolo Naldini.

  11 Pasquali 2004, pp. 35–38.

  12 Missing slabs are carefully signaled as late as in 1813 (Ecole nationale supérieure des beaux-arts, Restauration de 1813 par M. Leclère Architecte Pensionnaire du Roi à l’Académie de France à Rome, Paris 1813, tav. XXI).

  13 Works on the drainage system in Piazza della Rotonda were carried out by Padre Giuseppe Paglia.

  14 Pasquali 1996a, pp. 141–142.

  15 Pasquali 1996a, pp. 142–143 and p. 46, n. 10.

  16 Ronald T. Ridley, “To Protect the Monuments: The Papal Antiquarian 1534–1870,” in Xenia antiqua 1, 1992, pp. 117–154.

  17 Pasquali 1996a, pp. 143–144.

  18 Inigo Jones on Palladio; Being the Notes by Inigo Jones in the Copy of I quattro libri dell’architettura di Andrea Palladio 1601 in the Library of Worcester College, Oxford, ed. Bruce Allsopp, Newcastle upon Tyne 1970, pp. 81–82.

  19 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Chigi P VII 9, cc. 111–113; for which see bibliography in n. 9 of this chapter.

  20 Restoration work up to the first entablature was carried out by the soprintendenza of Rome, 1992–1995; information on techniques employed by Alessandro Specchi was kindly provided by Mario Lolli Ghetti, architect in charge at the time.

  21 Giornale de’ Letterati d’Italia (Rome) 7, 1711, pp. 447–456, speaks of the cadavere nudo di tutti gli ornamenti (Pasquali 1996a, p. 144).

  22 Sabine, Jacob, ed., Italienische Zeichnungen des Kunstbibliotheck Berlin. Architektur und Dekoration 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert, Berlin 1975, p. 144; Tod A. Marder, “Specchi’s High Altar for the Pantheon and the Statues by Cametti and Moderati,” Burlington Magazine 122, 1980, pp. 30–40.

  23 Royal Library, Windsor Castle, Albani Volumes, n. 188, f. 10636; Allan Braham and Hellmut Hager, Carlo Fontana: The Drawings at Windsor Castle, London 1971, n. 601; Pasquali 1996a, pp. 144–145.

  24 Pasquali 1996a, pp. 42–44, n. 38.

  25 Christian reuse of pagan temples was at the time a much debated topic. Rites of Christian consecration of ancient edifices and altars were carefully described in 1744 in Marangoni 1744; the Jesuit Lazeri, in order to deny the existence of such past practices, claimed that the ancient Pantheon had never been a temple but only a large bath hall (P. Lazeri, Della consacrazione del Pantheon fatta da Bonifacio IV, Rome 1749).

  26 Marder 1980.

  27 Krautheimer 1985, p. 185: “le nuove decorazioni deformano più che migliorano l’antico monumento”; C. Fea, Annotazioni alla m
emoria sui diritti del Principato sugli edifizi pubblici sacri e profani, Rome 1806, p. 114.

  28 John Soane Museum, London, James Gibbs Ms, AL 39A, p. 6.

  29 Anne-Claude-Philippe Comte de Caylus, Voyage d’Italie 1714–1715, ed. A. A. Pons, Paris 1914, p. 184; Charles de Brosses, Lettres d’Italie, ed. F. D’Agay, Paris 1986, letter 39, p. 52.

  30 Pasquali 1996a, pp. 144–150, 154–156; budget of works: pp. 150–153.

  31 The local government, an elective body with a tradition going back to the Middle Ages, had special jurisdiction over the conservation of all ancient monuments in Rome; the privilege came from what was presumed to be a continuity of the modern government on the Capitoline Hill with the ancient Roman Senate.

  32 Pasquali 1996a, pp. 150–153.

  33 “Ad Summi Sacrorum Christianorum,” February–March 1756, in Benedicti Papae XIV Bullarium, IX, Venetiis 1784; Pasquali 1996a, pp. 158–160.

  34 Pasquali 1996a, p. 75, n. 43.

  35 Pasquali 1996a, p. 75, n. 43.

  36 A. Uncini, “Due capitelli dal Pantheon nella Collezione del Museo Gregoriano Profano ex Lateranense,” in Bollettino dei monumenti musei e gallerie pontificie 8, 1988, pp. 55–63.

  37 Evidence of the works begun on the vault by Pope Alexander VII is visible in one of Pannini’s canvases (Copenhagen, Staten Museum for Kunst, inv. n. 4694; Pasquali, Fig. 33). Whitewash is documented in Pasquali 1996a, pp. 73–75.

  38 Pasquali 1996a, p. 78, n. 10.

  39 Pasquali 1996a, pp. 92–101.

  40 Bruno Contardi and Giovanna Curcio, eds., In urbe architectus. Modelli, disegni, misure. La professione dell’architetto a Roma 1680–1750, Rome 1991, pp. 422–424.

  41 Only one of Posi’s original drawings is known (Archivio di Stato Torino, Archivio Cestelli Bessoni, cart. 5, fasc. 109); another project by a pupil, Giuseppe Piermarini, may be a copy of a lost original or a personal interpretation of the theme (M. Tabarrini, “Catalogo del fondo piermariniano di Foligno,” no. 1.3, p. 66, in Giuseppe Piermarini. I disegni di Foligno. Il volto piermariniano della Scala, exh. cat., Milan 1998). Both differ from the project as realized.

  42 Franco Bartolotti, La medaglia annuale dei romani pontefici da Paolo V a Paolo VI, 1605–1967, Rimini 1967, p. 174.

  43 Posi’s final project was first published (and censured) in A. Visentini, Osservazioni di Antonio Visentini Architetto veneto, che servono di continuazione al trattato di Teofilo Gallaccini, Venice 1771, pp. 16–23; an alternative design is proposed on p. 22.

  44 From surviving descriptions, the proposed glazing was made of an iron frame and glass (Pasquali 1996a, p. 45).

  45 The gratuitous removal of the two large granite slabs from their original position is first documented by Piranesi (in G. B. Piranesi, Vedute di Roma, Roma n.d.: “Veduta interna del pronao del Pantheon,” letter D). About the monumental tables (more than 3 meters long), now in Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, see Chiara Felicetti, ed., Cristoforo Unterperger. Un pittore fiemmese nell’Europa del Settecento, exh. cat., Rome 1998, pp. 64–68.

  46 When in Rome, the Abbot of Saint-Non heard rumors about the presumed interest of the contractors of the works (Pierre Rosenberg, ed., Saint-Non, Fragonard. Panopticon italiano. Un diario di viaggio ritrovato 1759–1761, Paris 1986, pp. 134–135). In May 1757, the architect Luigi Vanvitelli commented in a private letter on a defamatory libel written against Posi (Luigi Vanvitelli, Le lettere di Luigi Vanvitelli della Biblioteca Palatina di Caserta, Galatina, 1976, n. 465, May 15, 1757).

  47 Pasquali 1996a, p. 77.

  48 Pasquali 2008.

  49 Pasquali 2008.

  50 Vanvitelli 1976, no. 454, March 29, 1757.

  51 In 1757, Piranesi had Corsini’s drawings in his hands (Pasquali 1996a, p. 72, n. 33); later, they were published by his son (Francesco Piranesi, Seconda parte de’ templij antichi che contiene il celebre Pantheon …, Rome 1790, Plate XXIX).

  52 An anonymous drawing proposing a different attic was recently attributed to Piranesi (Elisabeth Kieven, ed., Von Bernini bis Piranesi. Römische Architekturzeichnungen des Barock, exh. cat., Stuttgart 1993, no. 134) and connected to Posi’s work (Lola Kantor Kazovsky, “Pierre Jean Mariette and Piranesi: The Controversy Reconsidered,” in The Serpent and the Stylus: Essays on G. B. Piranesi, ed. M. Bevilacqua, H. Hyde Minor, and F. Barry, Ann Arbor 2006, pp. 149–168). No documents have since emerged, and during the 1750s, a Piranesi’s involvement as architect of the Pantheon seems highly improbable.

  53 In his correspondence, Vanvitelli had occasion to criticize Posi’s project, regarding it as an undertaking of modern architecture that he did not like (Vanvitelli 1757, no. 454, March 29, 1757). He did not, however, protest against the destruction of the attic.

  54 Mais ce qui fait le plus de peine à ceux qui ont reçû de la Nature un peu de sentiment et un peu de goût, c’est la mauvaise idée que l’on a eu en dernier lieu de blanchir toute la voûte intérieure de cet édifice; ce majestueux dont ont étoit frapé [sic] en y entrant est évanoüi, l’on n’y retrouve plus ce mistérieux, ces beaux tons respectables que les milliers d’années y avoient repandus; ce n’est plus, enfin, qu’un grande salle ronde, un grand café qui n’a rien d’étonnant que sa forme et sa grandeur (Rosenberg 1986, pp. 134–135).

  55 Che direbbe il Serlio, il Palladio, il Desgodetz, che hanno durato tanta fatica a misurare i membri di quel classico edifizio? Che dirà il Pannini che lo ha tante volte ricopiato nell’antica sua forma? (Giovanni Gaetano Bottari and Stefano Ticozzi, eds., Raccolta di lettere sulla pittura, scultura e architettura, vol. 7, Milan 1822, pp. 405–408; the letter, here dated 1756, was in fact written in 1757).

  56 Pasquali 2004, pp. 38–43.

  57 Pasquali 2004, pp. 43–49.

  Twelve A Nineteenth-Century Monument for the State

  Robin B. Williams

  In the late nineteenth century, the Pantheon became hostage to an ideological battle over the city of Rome fought between factions of the Italian government and religious leaders from the Vatican. At stake were the function and identity of the venerable temple. This confrontation grew out of the larger drama of the Risorgimento, the Italian unification movement that began under Napoleon, who briefly united the Italian peninsula under his rule and instigated a burgeoning of nationalistic sentiment.

  In the aftermath of Napoleon’s defeat in 1815, the peninsula was carved up into numerous small kingdoms and duchies. At first, patriots, notably Giuseppe Mazzini, who founded the revolutionary “Young Italy” political society while in exile in Marseille in 1831, and the military hero Giuseppe Garibaldi sought the creation of an Italian republic. They achieved partial success by capturing Rome in 1849 and proclaiming the Roman Republic. Within six months, however, the French army quashed the uprising, drove Mazzini and Garibaldi back into exile, and restored Pope Pius IX to power. After several false starts in different corners of the peninsula throughout the 1850s, the king of Piedmont-Sardinia, Vittorio Emanuele II of the House of Savoy, and notably his prime minister, Camillo Cavour, spearheaded a successful unification campaign from the north beginning in 1860. To the south, Garibaldi and his famous “thousand” men captured the Kingdom of Two Sicilies, which they turned over to Vittorio Emanuele. The only notable Italian region outside of his control was the Papal States, which spanned the center of the peninsula. In March 1861, Italy was formally established as a constitutional monarchy with its capital first at Turin; in 1865, the capital was transferred to Florence, a more central location. Fierce regionalism, however, threatened to undermine the unification movement unless the only mutually acceptable capital city could be secured – Rome.

  The capture of Rome in 1870 presented Italian leaders with the challenge of transforming the capital of Catholicism into the secular capital of their newly unified nation. During the first six years of “Roma Capitale,” a coalition of conservatives (the Destra), eager to mend relations with the Vatican, controlled the Italian government. Their policy of appeasement came to an end in 1876, when parliament fell und
er the control of the left (the Sinistra) led by anticlerics, who would retain power for the next 25 years – a remarkable duration by Italian standards. For Sinistra leaders, Roman antiquities provided a tangible link to the imperial glory they wished to emulate and a means of superseding church authority. The Pantheon played a decisive role within the larger story of Italy’s creation of a national identity in Rome that culminated in the Victor Emanuel Monument, the enormous white marble pile that dominates the north slope of the Capitoline Hill in the center of Rome. The patriotic enterprise profoundly affected the Pantheon itself: we owe to this period some dedicated campaigns of restoration and isolation of the ancient edifice, creating its present-day appearance; the preservation of its function as a church; and the presence of the two royal tombs that dominate the cross axes of the interior.

  From the outset of the Risorgimento in the early nineteenth century, most patriots recognized Rome as the only legitimate capital city acceptable to the new country’s diverse regions. While the victory of Italian troops in September 1870 brought an end to papal rule over Rome, Italian leaders confronted a city whose buildings and monuments readily testified to many centuries of ecclesiastical dominion. One contemporary observer, the German historian Ferdinand Gregorovius, commented that “at every step one sees nothing but memories and monuments of the popes: churches, convents, museums, fountains, palaces, obelisks with crosses, the imperial columns with Saints Peter and Paul on their summits, thousands of tombs of bishops and priests, an atmosphere saturated with the spirit of the ruin, of the catacomb and of religion.... All of Rome is like a monument of the Church in all its epochs, from Nero and Constantine down to Pius IX.”1 The Pantheon, the best-preserved vestige of Roman antiquity in the city, epitomized the continuity of the city’s life and power from antiquity to the present. Having been, in the seventh century, one of the first of many ancient Roman structures converted to Christian use, it had served as a Catholic church almost three times longer than it had as a pagan temple. This dual significance of the Pantheon, whose history reflected that of the city, inspired French engravers Philippe and Félix Benoist to place it prominently between images of ancient and papal Rome in their capriccio for the book Rome dans sa grandeur of 1870 (Fig. 12.1).