This article was downloaded by: [Princeton University]On: 11 November 2014, At: 12:24Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Journal of Garden HistoryPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgah19

Political messages in the Medici Palace gardenMatthew G. LooperPublished online: 30 Apr 2012.

To cite this article: Matthew G. Looper (1992) Political messages in the Medici Palace garden, The Journal of Garden History, 12:4, 255-268, DOI:10.1080/01445170.1992.10410554

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01445170.1992.10410554

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However,Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability forany purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views ofor endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Political messages.tn the Medici Palace garden

MATTHEW G. LOOPER

Throughout his political career, probably the most constant problem Cosimo de'Medici faced was his image. As the functional ruler of the republic of Florence, hehad to display a certain amount ofwealth and behave in princely ways in order tomeet noble rulers of other states on equal ceremonial terms.! Yet, since he had nolegal title ofauthority, the moral codes ofthe Florentine public restricted him fromdisplaying too much wealth, lest he overstep his social status. As a result, Cosimo hadto maintain a delicate balance between appearing wealthy but not ostentatious. 2

The various princes who visited or stayed at his palace on the Via Larga (now ViaCavour) or his villas" obviously found him to be a most worthy host and, in fact, asplendid one, as is evident from comments on his regal bearing made by the princeamong princes, Pope Pius II. 4 And, yet, in front of this very same pope, whenasked for help in a crusade, Cosimo replied coolly, 'You well know how limited isthe power ofa private citizen under popular government'. 5 Cosimo was obviouslyquite adept at projecting the appropriate image, either magnificent prince orhumble citizen, at the right moments.

In this paper, I make a case for an interpretation of the Medici Palace gardenbefore 1464, the year of Cosimo's death, as a symbolic environment that wasinvolved in the creation of this double image ofCosimo. 6 The layout and much ofthe iconography of the garden carry strong princely overtones which, I believe,would have cast Cosimo in a princely light. The centrepiece of the garden,however, Donatello's fountain sculpture of Judith and Holofernes, carriesinformation on a different level that appears to make a strong statement upholdingthe virtues of the republican state. Far beyond being simply a pleasant retreat assome studies have suggested," Cosimo's garden at the Medici Palace seems to havebeen an important forum for power play. My study begins with a description ofthe garden itself and comments on its siting.

A look at maps of Renaissance Florence confirms Richard Goldthwaite's"statement that many of the city's palaces had attached private gardens. TheBuonsignori view 0(1584 (which looks approximately northward) shows thatwalls were built on the central parts ofmany of the blocks outside of the city coreto create irregularly shaped gardens. Since even a smallish block such as that just

JOURNAL OF GARDEN HISTORY, 1992, VOL. 12, No.4, 255-268

north ofthe Duomo, defined by the Via Ricasoli, the Via de' Pucci, and the Via de'Servi (figure 1) contained no fewer than seven walled gardens, it appears that evennon-palatial residences were able to have some spots ofgreen at the back. Many ofthe Florentine religious institutions appear also to have devoted large amounts ofspace to parks and gardens. In addition to these larger spaces, however, it is clearfrom other sources that Florentines tucked plants into the smallest nooks thatreceived some sunlight. The roof of the Strozzi Palace loggia was converted intogardens with lemon and orange trees, for instance." Even at the Rucellai Palace,

Figure 1. Block defined by the Via Ricasoli, the Via de' Pucci, and the Via de' Servi.Buonsignori view, detail.

0144-5170/92 $3·00 © 1992 Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

256 MATTHEW G. LOOPER

with its cramped site, part ofthe courtyard was used for a garden, and potted plantswere placed on the upper terrace.!"

Thus, the joining ofa garden to the Medici Palace as shown on the Buonsignorimap (figure 2) would seem not to be at all out of the ordinary. What is unusualabout the palace garden siting, however, is that it is bounded on two sides by wallsthat run along streets-the Via de' Gori and the Borgo San Lorenzo (now Via de'Ginori). The Buonsignori view shows that, while walls frequently separatedinstitutional gardens from streets, residences as near to the city centre as the MediciPalace did not have such arrangements. The Medici garden walls, unlike those ofother residential gardens, were not hidden from the view of people in the street,and thus they contribute to the exterior image of the palace.

Two factors seem especially important in explaining this unusual relationshipofthe garden to the streets. First, the width ofthe Via Larga and the location of theold Medici Palace just north up the Via Larga11 seem to have been primary reasonsfor Cosimo's positioning ofthe main entrance ofhis palace on the Via Larga ratherthan on the Via de' Gori. The relationship of garden to palace, therefore, merelyrepeats that of the old palace of the Medici, which had an orange garden at theback. This garden very likely corresponded to the large walled enclosure visible onthe Buonsignori map north of the new Medici Palace.V The second reason for thegarden's siting may have to do with the relationship ofthe angles ofthe streets thatdelimit the building site to the desired shape of the palace. Since the Via de' Goriand the Borgo San Lorenzo do not intersect at right angles (see figure 3),construction of the main part of a palace on this comer would have caused it todeviate from the desired square plan. The garden, therefore, takes up the space notcovered by the main part ofthe palace, giving it an irregular quadrilateral plan. It isdefined on the east by the rear of the palace, on the south and west by crenellatedwalls, more than 9 m high, and on the north by other houses. The open area of thegarden measures approximately 35 m from north to south and about 18 m betweenthe two doorways shown on the Buonsignori view that give access to the gardenon the east and west. 13 These dimensions are approximately the same today as theywere in the fifteenth century.

Because the garden was drastically remodelled by the Riccardi when theybought the palace in the seventeeth century, additional information about theoriginal appearance ofthe garden must be gleaned from verbal descriptions, plans,or from reports of 1911-1912 cxplorations.v" The most important architecturalstructure in the garden was the three-bay loggia which stood along the south walland which could be entered by a door from the south-west piano terreno room

Figure 2. Medici Palace. Buonsignori view, detail.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Figure 3. Block of the Medici Palace, after Alessandra Bossi and Maria TeresaBartoli, 'II Rilievo Metrico,' in II Palazzo Medici Riccardi di Firenze, GiovanniCherubini and Giovanni Fanelli (eds) (Florence, 1990), figure 9 a.

(figure 4).15 It was also mentioned in the account of the 1469 wedding ofLorenzode' Medici as the structure under which the bride and many female dancers satduring the banquets.I" In the Buonsignori view, we observe what appears to be asecond loggia on the northern end of the garden, mirroring the southern loggia.However, because there is no physical or documentary evidence for an actualloggia in this northern location, the inclusion of the arched figure in theBuonsignori view may simply have been for the purpose ofshowing that there wasa loggia somewhere in the garden. Alternatively, the arches in the picture may be a

representation of an engaged arcade or perhaps a sgraffito design. Originally, thewest wall was covered with sgraffito designs of bossed stone"? and had arches onconsoles which held up a hangmg gallery. IS A 1650 plan (figure 5) shows that thisgallery walkway extended the entire length of the west wall and on to a platformover the southern loggia. Access to the walkway could be had both through doorson the back ofthe palace at the piano nobile level and, probably, by a small enclosedstairway at the north-west corner of the garden. Ground-level pathways are verydifficult to reconstruct, but the 1469 wedding account states that women wereseated along the walls up to the doors;"? strongly suggesting that dry stone pathswere laid out around the perimeter of the garden.

Concerning the original plantings and fittings ofthe garden, our information isvery fragmentary. 20 One ofthe earliest reports ofthe garden, a letter from Niccoli>de' Carissimi da Parma, a counsellor of Galeazzo Maria Sforza, son of FrancescoSforza, Duke of Milan, dated 17 April 1459, describes it as:

a garden done in the finest of polished marbles with diverse plants, which seems athing not natural but painted. And among other things there is an adder in the formofthe device ofYour Excellency, and beside it there is the shield with the arms of theaforementioned Cosimo. This adder and arms are ofnew-planted grass in a piece ofground so that, the more the grass grows, the more that device will grow.P!

In the descriptions of the garden written during this visit, there is no mention ofafountain. Later documents, however, show that by 1464, the year of Cosimo'sdeath, a fountain crowned by Donatello's statue ofJudith and Holofernes (figure 6)had been installed probably in the middle ofthe Medici Palace garden.V This statueofbronze with gilt accents stood on a column to which was attached an inscriptionreading, 'Regna cadunt luxu sutgent virtutibus urbes caesa vides humili colla superba

manu' ('Kingdoms fall through luxury, cities rise through virtues; behold the neckofpride severed by the hand ofhumility'j.A> Water, flowing out of the corners ofthe pillow under Holofernes, fell into a basin, perhaps one made of granite withmarble embellishments, described by Vasari and others.P" Since the 1459 lettersseem to indicate that the centrepiece of the garden was the insignia done in grass, itis possible that the garden was not yet complete at this time and that the Judithgroup was installed shortly afterward in the place where the grass had been.Cosimo and his family, it seems, had only just moved into the palace a year or twobefore 1459, and it is understandable that many of the finishing touches had yet tobe applied to their new residence.s"

The letters from the young Sforza and his adviser give a strong sense that thepalace of the Medici was extremely open to privileged guests.F" Apparently,visitors could walk through in a leisurely manner and admire much ofthe interior.In so far as it seems to have been a stage for the interaction of princely guest andresident, the Medici Palace conforms to Francis Kent's-? notion of fifteenth-

257

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Figure 4. Plan of Medici Palace piano terreno.Kunsthistorisches Institute Florenz.

century palaces. The letters certainly indicate that the Medici Palace does not fitGoldthwaite's-l" interpretation of palaces as closed fortresses of small, reclusivemerchant families. Ofcourse, one would not expect all Florentine palaces to be asopen as that of the Medici. As Richard Trexlers? points out, Cosimo's intimacyand ritual interaction with princes at his palace set him apart from other citizens.

That the garden participated in a discourse between Cosimo and princely guestmight seem surprising given the usual escapist attitude of Florentines towardgardens. Boccaccio's Decameron, in particular, and many letters and treatises hintstrongly at the Florentine consideration of green, growing places as retreats fromsociety and civic duty.30 Yet, both written accounts and the garden's design itselfsuggest that the Medici garden was highly accessible and integrated into the total

258 MATIHEW G. LOOPER

palace design. The loggia platform and the hanging gallery especially seem to havebeen designed at least in part to show off the garden to guests."!

Iconographic, formal, and spatial parallels and continuities between the palacebuilding and the garden also made the garden more accessible. Beginning on theexterior ofthe palace (figure 7), quoins at the north-west and south-west corners ofthe garden repeat the rusticated textures of the palace's piano terreno facade. Thebench, like a belt, wraps around both garden and palace and presents them as asingle unit. Furthermore, entrance to the palace through the androne points onedirectly toward the garden entrance, since the large east and west doors of thegarden are aligned on the same axis that passes through the androne ofthe palace andthe centre of the court. The effect is exactly analogous to that of Domenico

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Veneziano's Annunciation from the St Lucy altarpiece (figure 8), the perspectivelines of which direct one's eye beyond the collonaded court and into the garden inthe rear. The invitation to enter is powerful indeed.

The courtyard and garden are also visually similar, thus bringing the gardeninto a close relationship with the palace. The arched forms in sgraffito or stonewhich decorated the west and south and perhaps the north sides of the gardenrepeated the columns and arches of the courtyard, lending an overall lightness andairiness to both areas. The sgrtiffito designs on the walls of the court and garden wereeven executed in the same style. 3 2 Both court and garden also had bronze

Figure 5. Plan of Medici Palace primo piano: (a) gallerywalkway; (b) loggia platform; (c) door connecting palaceand platform; (d) stairway. Kunsthistorisches InstituteFIorenz.

sculptures, placed in their centres and elevated on columns. These two sculptures,theJudith and Holofernes group and Donatello's bronze David, even constitute aniconographic pair. 33 Both sculptures represent biblical heroes who triumphedover the enemies of Israel. Judith prefigures Mary and David, Christ. Theirassociation was common in medieval Italian religious art and appears long after theMedici Palace was built, in the Sistine Chapel ceiling for example.A"

The degree ofintegration ofgarden and palace is remarkable and supports theinterpretation of the garden as a place that was meant to be highly accessible toguests. I now turn to a discussion ofthe reasons for this increased accessibility-the

259

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

260 MATIHEW G. LOOPER

Figure 6. Donatello,Judith and Holofemes,Uffizi. Bronze, height 7feet 9 inches (includingbase). Alinari/ArtResource, New York.

Figure 7. Exterior view of Medici Palace garden wall. Bazzechi/KunsthistorischesInstitute Florenz.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Figure 8. Domenico Veneziano, Annunciation. Panel, 10i inches x 21t inches.Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, UK.

messages guests were intended to receive when they passed through the garden.Because the fifteenth-century Italian garden was the product of a long andrich tradition with roots in Europe, Africa and the Near East, its interpretation isnot an easy task. At the root of any garden symbolism, one would suppose, arefound some of the most basic concepts of human interest, such as fertility,abundance, and growth. Yet, Western traditions show a distinct twist on thesesimple, positive themes. In the Judea-Christian tradition, where there were trees,there was bound to be forbidden fruit. In addition to Eden, Biblical images such asthe betrayal ofChrist in the Garden ofGethsemane and the fruits of bad and goodtrees in the gospel of Matthew (7:17) contributed to the conceptualization of thegarden in Christian Europe as an ambiguous realm.P" Ancient Greeks and Romanshad a part in this discourse, as we recall that a walk in a pagan forest or gardenmight bring one face to face with an enchantress or envious deity.

In medieval times, the ambiguity of gardens was manifested, for instance, inthe arbor bona and arbor mala pair of De Pructibus Carnis et Spiritus, supposedly byHugo ofSt Victor.P? Similarly, for thirteenth- and fourteenth-century Florentinewriters, gardens could inspire both joy and sorrow, as Petrarch laments in Trionfod'Amore,37 or even harbour danger, as we see in Brunetto Latini's Tesoretto.e" Lustand cupidity, too, were well-known inhabitants of the gardens offourteenth- andfifteenth-century Tuscan literature and pictorial art. 3 9 By the mid-fifteenthcentury, the uses of garden imagery were so complex that, in order toaccommodate the majority of the garden's associations, one would have to statevery broadly that the garden represented a number of heavenly and earthly

conditions that facilitated transformations of its inhabitants into states of concordand discord. In order to get to the particular meanings ofa given garden, however,one must interpret the details of the garden's decoration, layout and iconography.As I will suggest, an analysis ofthese elements ofthe Medici Palace garden supportsthe identification of one of its primary messages as referring to the princeliness ofCosimo.

In order to understand how this message might have been transmitted, it isessential to grasp how a mid-fifteenth-century mind would have been conditionedto 'read' a garden. A large body of literature from the period enables one to getsome idea of the processes involved. In most of these works, the narrative is somevariation on what must be one ofthe fundamental narrative structures in the West:the penetration of a garden by a protagonist longing for something, his progresstoward the centre and, finally, a climactic event in the centre of the garden thatresolves the protagonist's problem. Very often, the climactic transformationoccurs through the powers ofa fountain located at the centre of the garden. In theRoman de la Rose ofGuillaume de Lorris, the protagonist passes through the gardenwall and is irresistibly drawn to the central fountain ofNarcissus. There, as he gazesinto the waters he discovers, through the two crystals at the bottom, both theworld and the lady.40 In a similar manner, the dreamer protagonist of the latefifteenth-century fantasy Hypnerotomachia Poliphili is situated initially on the shoreof the Island of Cythera but finds himself irresistibly drawn to the core of thecircular garden and the amphitheatre of Venus. Lovers, in Tuscan secular art of thefourteenth and fifteenth centuries, also found themselves pulled toward fountainsthat actually inspired love.r"!

Dante's Commedia contains two gardens which also illustrate this narrativetype. The first, in Purgatorio, focuses on the fountain at the centre of the EarthlyParadise. As described in Canto XXVIII, 121-129, it pours forth two streams-oneblots sin from memory, the other restores the memory of good deeds. Dantedrinks from the first and, upon reaching the second in Canto XXXIII and tasting it,finds that he is 'Renewed with new-sprung foliage through and through'(1. 144).42 With this act, not only does the dreamer resolve his guilt, but the Cantoand, in fact, the entire book of Purgatorio end. The second garden image in theCommedia is the celestial rose ofParadisio Canto XXX, which is actually composedof banks of flowers representing souls of the Elect. Just as the Earthly Paradiseended Purgatorio, the celestial rose is Dante's final destination of Paradisio, for inviewing it, Dante realizes that 'My will and my desire were turned by love, Thelove that moves the sun and the other stars'. (144-145)-a remarkable state ofconcord, indeed.

It is with these kinds of narratives in mind, then, that we should approach thegarden of the Medici Palace. In fact, the arrangement of this garden leaves us with

261

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

little doubt that the central feature, the fountain topped with the bronzeJudith andHolofernes, is the primary thematic element of the garden. Not only its centrallocation but also its huge size set forth the fountain in this role. The sculpture groupalone measures almost 2! m from the bottom ofthe base to the top ofJudith's head.Standing on a large granite and marble basin and column, the entire groupprobably would have measured at least 5 m in height. Whether the garden wasoriginally intended to include the Judith group or not, its placement theresometime before 1464 set the tone for the entire garden, defining (or redefining) itstype and crystallizing its specific messages.

By considering the high, crenellated, surrounding walls together with thecentral fountain group, one may conclude that the garden makes symbolicreference to two specific literary gardens. The first is the hortus conclusus, a type thathad been firmly established in the Middle Ages as a primary symbol of the Virgin

Figure 9. Fra Angelico, Annunciation, Cortona Museum. Panel, 63 inches x 71 inches.Alinari/Art Resource, New York.

262 MAITHEW G. LOOPER

Mary. The meaning of this garden derived from the interpretation of SaintsJerome and Ambrose of Song of Songs (4:12): 'Hortus conclusus, soror mea sposa;hortus conclusus,fons signatus'.43 In mid-fifteenth-century Florentine iconography,the hortus conclusus was commonly coupled with images ofthe Annunciation to theVirgin, an early example being Fra Angelico's Cortona Annunciation (figure 9).To fashion one's palace garden into this type would carry with it strong overtonesof the goodness and virtue which were seen as the Virgin's characteristics.

The statue of Judith is instrumental in driving home the positive moralassociations of the hortus conclusus. Hans Kauffrnanrr-" first linked the figuralarrangement of this sculpture to the representations of victorious virtues of themedieval Psychomachia tradition. While posture alone would have been sufficientto trigger this association in the fifteenth-century viewer's mind, the second part ofthe inscription on the column below it made it doubly clear-caesa vides humili collasuperba manu. The group clearly symbolizes the victory of Humilitas over Superbiaand makes the garden a virtuous one. Furthermore, since the statue of Judithdefeating Holofernes refers to the Virgin's supremacy over the Devil,45 theassociation of the Medici Palace garden with the hortus conclusus and the Virgin isespecially strong.

As Edgar Wind46 pointed out, however, the pillow on which Holofernes sits,the clothed/naked contrast ofJudith and Holofernes, and the bacchanalian sceneson the base infuse the pair with a second virtue/vice contrast ofSanctimoniall.uxuria. This particular contrast makes reference to another literarygarden-the Garden of Eden-for it was in the Earthly Paradise and with theparticular vice of Luxuria that the Devil first tempted and seduced man. Since theJudith group emphasizes not the temptation and fall of man, but the victory ofvirtue over Luxuria, the Medici Palace garden is cast as a realm in which evil isvanquished. The figure that dominates the garden is Judith/Mary, who throughvirtue restores mankind to the state of purity found in the Garden of Eden.

It should be noted that these conflations of Mary and Judith, Eden and thehortus conclusus are not found only in the garden at the Medici Palace. St Antonine'sSumma, which was in Cosimo's Iibrary.r'? singles out Judith as an importantprefiguration ofMary.f" Likewise, in the garden ofDante's celestial rose, we findJudith seated directly under the Virgin (Canto XXXII, 10). In Fra Angelico'sCortona Annunciation, the Garden ofEden and the hortus conclusus are presented asparallels since a small scene of the Expulsion of Adam and Eve is included in theupper left corner of the panel (figure 9).

A garden made into an image ofParadise before the fall carried with it a wholeseries of courtly and imperial associations that would, in turn, likely have borneindexically on the man seen as the garden's creator-Cosimo. The word 'Paradise'itself has royal connotations since it evolved from the name for royal parks in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

ancient Persia. By the time the Bible was translated into Greek the term could referto royal gardens, heaven, or Eden.e? But in addition, Christian cultures had longseen an imperial archetype in the pre-fall condition ofAdam as sole ruler over Edenand, hence, the world.50 Christ, as king of kings, frequently was presented ingarden imagery to playoffof this imperial connection. For example, the MysticalParadise of the Speculum Virginum is shown in a rose form with water flowing inall world directions. 51 Christ is placed at the middle, and his followers, theevangelists, fan out from the centre in a representation of their proselytizingmission. As Christ was to restore the empire ofAdam through spreading the wordofGod, he was, in effect, the new gardener ofEden, responsible for creating a newParadise. God, ofcourse, is the ultimate emperor, since he possesses all and createdthe Earthly Paradise, so he, too, came to be called a gardener, for example, inParadisio XXVI, 64-66 of the Commedia. Ofcourse, just as the pre-fall Paradise wasthe imperial side of the post-fall Paradise, the hortus conclusus of the Annunciationhad another, royal side-s-that of the celestial garden court of the Queen ofHeaven.V

The form of the hortus conclususfParadise, with its high wall that obstructedvision of the outside world, also refers to the imperial realm, since from any pointin it one is always aware of and able to view the entire garden. It is an entirelyself-contained locus, over which the viewer has total visual control-the kind ofvision described in Canto XXX of Paradisio (118-123):

My sight, being undismayed, ne'er went amissIn all that amplitude and height, but knewThe full extent and nature of such bliss.

For 'near' and 'far' no reckoning is due,Since nothing by the law of nature goesWhere God no agents needs His will to do.

A eulogy of the Medici written by an anonymous poet uses this same device tosuggest that the Medici garden was an image ofthe hortus conclususfParadise. Ofthepalace garden in 1459 it observed, 'one look shows what is planted there'. 53

Although this poet probably did not even see the garden, this way ofwriting aboutthe garden's closure contributed to the presentation of Cosimo as Christ leadingFlorence to greatness. 54

The Medici Palace garden also refers to Paradise, and, in turn, to the ideal city,in that the delicate arches that decorated its west, south, and perhaps its north wallsimitated the form ofa monastic cloister, a well-known cosmic diagram. A well orfountain often dominates the garden or meadow within a cloister, much like theJudith fountain towers over the palace garden. The monastery is conceptually aminiature city, and its fountain or well is analogous to the civic fountains that

provided water for many a medieval city.55 In the Medici Palace garden, theJudithfountain likens the garden to an ideal city not only through its central location,which is like that ofa civic fountain, but the story ofJudith specifically casts her as aheroine who brings water to a city. Her defeat of the general Holofernes ended hissiege of the city of Bethulia and allowed for the restoration of its water supply.Furthermore, the enclosing, crenellated wall of the garden refers to the defensivewall that surrounded the medieval city.

Many other ofthe elements of the garden cast Cosimo in a princely light. Mostobvious of these, probably, is the intertwined arms of the Duke of Milan andCosimo that he had created in grass for the 1459 celebrations. Clearly theintertwining of the arms puts Cosimo on the same level as the Duke, whopresumably would not have resented this symbolism since his coming to powerwas dependent somewhat on Medici influence. Rab Hatfield'ss" observation thatthe arms done in the growing medium ofgrass alludes to the growth offriendshipbetween the Sforza and Medici is true enough, but the planting and growth ofthegrass insignia in Cosimo's garden carries the connotation that Cosimo, likewise,was the one who not only 'made' himself, but 'made' the Sforza who they were aswell.

The richness of materials used in the garden as well as the quality ofworkmanship are also extremely significant in conveying a princely image. Theplacement ofa huge gilt bronze freestanding statue in his garden alone outstrippedthe magnificence ofmost princes. When considered along with the other materialsof the fountain (marble and granite), the delicate and graceful sgraffito designs onthe walls, the stone columns and fine Corinthian capitals of the loggia, in additionto the grass and 'diverse plants', 57 the garden's aspect was one ofgreat delicacy andrichness. An anonymous poet conveyed this grace and diversity in typicallyparadisiacal terms:

A dance is there, as gentle as one can say,ofjasmine, violets, roses and lilies,and flowers blue, yellow, white and red.

Nor is there anyone who finds it strangethat there should be animals and little birdswhich do not take fright if one picks them Up.58

The visitor to the Medici Palace garden was likely meant to absorb these richprincely images and then draw the conclusion that it was only by Cosirno's wealthand elegant taste that this Paradise came into being. Like the gardener God, it wassupposedly Cosimo who envisioned and created his own Paradise. But Cosimo didnot simply let his works speak for him. Vespasiano da Bisticci tells us that Cosimomade no secret of his horticultural aptitude. 59 In addition to actually performing

263

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

grafts, planting and pruning, he eagerly shared his knowledge of agriculturaltechniques. Cosimo, then, made it clear that he was the one who tended his gardensand caused them to come to fruition, like Christ.

Examination of the gardens and gardening activities of the actual princes of themid-fifteenth century reveals that they and Cosimo manipulated the same systemof symbols. Most importantly, we should note that the term 'Paradise' wascommonly used in princely states to refer to the places where governmentalactivities took place.s" The term carried with it all of the imperial overtones of theEarthly Paradise and implied a condition of concord among all the people inattendance. Iconographically, too, we may recognize gardens as princely andchivalrous domains. St George's defeat of the dragon, the archetypal chivalrousact, almost always took place in a garden or park setting, for example, and thekings and heroes of the Nine Worthies cycles are most often shown in tree-filledlandscapes-in the murals of jaquerio at La Manta, for example.s '

There was also a long European tradition of royal pleasure parks and gardens,the most famous ofwhich is probably the park at Hesdin, built by Count Robert IIof Artois. In the mid-fifteenth century this garden was still in use, as we see that in1464, for instance, Philip the Good feted a delegation of English ambassadorsthere.V At Hesdin, there was even a small garden called li Petit Paradis. Nearer toFlorence, and, interestingly, also with French connections, were the Paradisegardens created in Sicily under the Norman kings and in Angevin Naples.

It was at Rome, however, where the most symbolically significant Paradisesgrew. These were the papal gardens at the Vatican, which traditionally weresituated on the Mons Saccorum, at the current site of the Cortile di San Damaso.v-'As early as 1277-1283, Nicholas III had these gardens enclosed, irrigated, andplanted with trees.P" By the time Nicholas V became pope in 1447, the MonsSaccorum contained a garden defined by a low, crenellated wall in an irregularrectangle with small, crenellated towers at the comers.v" In 1450, GiovanniRucellai visited the Vatican and provided a description of the papal residence as 'amost beautiful abode and attached to the Church ofSt Peter with great and smallgardens and with a fish pond and fountain of water and with a conigIiera'-aground for small animals.s" We know from Manetti's second book of Life ofNicholas that the pope intended to build gardens behind the entrance gate to thepalace that would be 'filled with all the herbs and fruits that grow, watered by afountain supplied from the hills beyond', although his vision never materialized.v?The gardens of Pius II maintained the Paradise theme; the Mons was filled withplants of many kinds as well as domestic and exotic anirnals.s"

Nicholas V's Paradise, situated at the entrance ofhis palace, was clearly meantto be a place that would cast his meetings with visiting dignitaries in an atmosphereof concord. But also, by making these Paradises at the Vatican, filled with all the

264 MATIHEW G. LOOPER

creatures ofEden, the popes made clear claims to be the inheritors ofthe mission ofChrist."? Sometimes a pope would actually perform ritualized gardening. PopeBoniface IX, for instance (whom Vespasiano tells us Cosimo was specificallyimitating) pruned a few special vines every February."? The Paradise designed byLaurana at the Ducal Palace at Urbino for Federigo da Montefeltro is comparableto the gardens of the popes.Z! in the loggia of this garden, the Duke gave audienceto all who wished.V Again, the garden symbolized the world domain of theprince, who presided over it like Adam or Christ.

Since the gardens on the Mons Saccorum no longer exist, another aspect ofprince1iness, evident at Urbino, cannot be tested there. This is the feeling ofpossession one is given by the view from the balcony. To be able to take in thisview, it is implied that one is 'king ofthe hill' in every sense ofthe word-one mustbe placed literally and figuratively above other men. A somewhat comparableexperience is gained in the Medici Palace garden. Here, from atop the gardenloggia, one is given a magnificent view across a piazza to the parish church of SanLorenzo, built under Cosimo's patronage. Since the platform atop the gardenloggia is only easily accessible through doors on the primo piano that Cosimo couldhave opened or shut as he wished, it is conceivable that only Cosimo's privileged(princely) guests would have been allowed to view San Lorenzo from atop thisstructure. It is not at all difficult to imagine Cosimo escorting an entourage fromRome, Naples or Milan out of his sumptuous palace on to the platform andpraising the achievement of Brunelleschi in view of his church.

In both cases, at Urbino and Florence, however, the gardens' forms do notmodify the viewing experience. The garden merely provides the vantage point fora view that might as well be from a palace window. The situation is opposite at thePiccolomini Palace at Pienza. Here, presuming that the perforations in the gardenwall are not original, it is impossible to view the landscape from inside thegarden.T' In order to gain the possessive view, one must go into the palace andstand in the rear loggia at the primo piano level. From there, one takes in a beautifulview ofthe countryside in which the walled garden below actually serves to framethe view in addition to providing a visual transition between the palace and thenatural landscape. At Pienza, the view begins from outside the garden and isaffected by it; at Urbino and Florence, the view is from inside, but the gardens'forms do not condition the view.

In light ofthe many correspondences between princely gardens and Cosimo'sgarden, we may better understand Carissimi's exclamation about the MediciPalace that 'it is believed by all that there is no other earthly Paradise in the worldthan this'.74 The statement, far from being mere hyperbole, caps a number ofcomments in the letter about the magnificence and princeliness ofthe palace. Withone word, 'Paradise', the Medici Palace is put into the category of a princely

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

residence. In doing so, Carissimi makes it clear that the palace is certainly a suitablelodging for the young Sforza and would even be appropriate for the Duke himself.There was, however, another audience which included members who would viewsuch intimations ofgrandeur with scorn. There were the many citizens ofFlorencewho came to seek an audience with Cosimo. Without any reassurance ofhumility,such persons would be very likely to take offence at the rich and ornateenvironment ofthe palace and its garden. Cosimo needed to reassure his Florentineclients that he fully supported the republican government. In the palace garden, theinscription on the fountain under the Judith group performs this function.

Scholars have not missed the importance of the first part of the statue'sinscription, 'regna cadunt luxu surgent virtutibus urbes'; as being a clear statement ofthe superiority of the republican government over the monarchic, which Cosimoplaced to deflect criticism ofhis magnificcnce.?" The garden context supplementsthe meaning of this passage, however. In medieval thought, virtues and vices wereoften defined in terms of tree imagery, the prime example of which is in DeFructibus Carnis et Spiritus.": The tree ofvices, or arbormala, is a veritable bouquetof sin, as it is rooted in Supetbia and crowned with Luxuria and has leaves andbranches that represent various vices. Furthermore, it is clearly associated withBabylon, since certain examples are inscribed with the word 'Babilonia', Applyingthis symbolism to the Medici Palace garden, I would suggest that Holofernes, theincarnation of Superbia and Luxuria, also represents the arbor mala itself-Babylon.This hunch seems to find confirmation in the fact that Holofernes was a generalunder Nebuchadnezzar, king ofBabylon and is, therefore, a representative of thecity. judith's action, then, may be interpreted as the felling ofthe arbor mala, whichcomes crashing down, prefiguring Babylon's destruction for its sins prophesized inthe book ofRevelation (18:21). After reading the first part of the inscription, then,one sees Cosimo's garden as an allegory of the victory of the Florentine republicover tyranny. The garden walls and the flowers contained within represent not justany city but symbolize republican Florence, the city of flowers.

This reading ofthe garden is largely dependent on the inscription. Without thewords as a guide, the statue and the garden it accents would be read simply as anallegory of Medici virtue. The combined effect of the splendour and gracefulnessof the garden leave one totally convinced of Cosimo's princely aspirations. In theMedici Palace garden there seem to be two different information channels beingused to transmit two different messages. In exactly the same way that Piusencountered princeliness in Cosimo's manner but humility in his words, we findprinceliness in the appearances of the garden's iconography and plan and acompletely different message in the words of the fountain inscription.

While the strong messages ofstate politics seem to be introduced to Florence inthe Medici Palace garden, this garden was by no means the first political garden.

The plans and uses ofearlier princely gardens such as the papal Paradises in Romeor the park at Hesdin are deeply involved in state politics. In Florence, too, politicshad entered into the garden realm previously in the frescoes of the DavanzatiPalace, which place family arms in garden settings."? Here, however, the settingsonly relate to politics in that they serve to amplify the concord of the marriagealliance that the frescos commemorate. There is not the slightest hint of statepolitics in these images. The Medici Palace garden represents an infusion of thestate politics acted out at princely gardens into a special context-the garden of acitizen imitating a prince. It involved a careful choice of iconography in order toaccomplish political communication on more than one level, and it contrastsstrongly with the seemingly apolitical gardens built at some ofCosimo's villas­especially with the small garden at II Trebbio, which seems far better suited to quietconversation and thought. Cosimo's garden at the Medici Palace can, however, beseen as a direct ancestor ofthe highly political garden ofthe Grand Duke Cosimo atCastello. In the original garden of this villa, the symbolism blatantly proclaimedthe Duke's domination of Tuscany and the social benefits that derived from it.Following Vasari's interpretation, the garden's two fountains symbolized MonteAsinaio and Monte Falterona, and the streams of water issuing from themrepresented the rivers Mugnone and Arno.Z"

From a twentieth-century point of view it seems rather strange to have suchcomplicated ideas of state politics embodied in a garden. Yet, to make gardens astage for political statements is understandable enough in light of the fact that, likethe sacred groves of antiquity or the gardens of meditation of the Benedictinemonks of the Middle Ages, Renaissance gardens were seen not as passive 'settings'for human action. Rather, the visible beauty offlowers and ornaments, the soundsof birds and splashing water, the fragrance of herbs, and the humidity andtemperature variation between different parts of the garden were considered to beforces that permeated and invigorated the visitor. The combined effect of theseinspirational forces was to move the visitor into a state in which he or she becameopen to, for example, temptation, peace, or perhaps Cupid's arrow. Thus thegarden not only 'represented' a condition of concord or discord. It was activelyinvolved in creating that condition. And this activity is precisely the quality ofgardens that makes them ideal as vehicles for political statements.

Austin, Texas

AcknowledgementsThe author wishes to thank Dr Brenda Preyer for the use ofher resources and forother help in the preparation of this paper.

265

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

Notes1. See R. C. TREXLER, Public Life in Renaissance Florence (New York, 1980), especially

Chap. 12; and L. MARTINES, Power and Imagination. City-States in Renaissance Italy (NewYork, 1979), p. 229ff.

2. E. H. GOMBRICH, 'The early Medici as patrons ofart', Italian Studies: A Tribute to the LateCecilia M. Ady (London, 1960), reprinted in Norm and Form (London, 1963), pp. 35-57.

3. In addition to the visits of Pope Pius II and Galeazzo Maria Sforza in 1459, GaleazzoMaria stayed at the palace in 1467 and 1471. In 1465 Ippolita Sforza, the wife of aNeapolitan prince, also stayed there, as did a Neapolitan princess in 1473.

4. Note Pius' comments in PIUSII, 'The commentaries ofPius II, Book II', translated by F.ALDEN GRAGG, Smith College Studies in History, 25 (1939-1940), pp. 162-163. See also L.BEK, Towards Paradise on Earth: Modern Space Conception in Architecture: a Creation ofRenaissance Humanism (Odense, 1980), p. 83.

5. G. A. BRUCKER, Renaissance Florence (New York, 1969), p. 160.6. One should note that I am not particularly concerned with the question of who was

actually responsible for the garden's design and decoration. There simply is not enoughdocumentation to show ifCosimo alone actually directed the design and iconographicprogramme or if certain elements were commissioned by his son, Piero. Giovanni diCosimo may even have had some input. (See GOMBRICH (note 2), especially p. 46,for opinions on the divisions of patronage among family members. See also note 22,below, on the patronage of the statue ofJudith of Holofernes, the centrepiece of thegarden.) It seems likely, however, that visitors to the garden before 1464 would haveunderstood its appearance as having bearing on the character of the head ofhousehold,Cosimo. This conclusion is based on a number of sources which seem to give Cosimocredit for the invention of various buildings, including the Medici Palace, and whichassociate their splendour with the character ofCosimo. See, for instance, PIUS II, 'Thecommentaries ofPius II, Book II', translated by F. ALDEN GRAGG, Smith College Studiesin History, 25 (1939-1940), pp.162, 166. See also GOMBRICH (note 2), pp.41--42. Theaffixation, perhaps in 1466, ofan inscription to the statue ofJudith and Holofernes thatnamed Piero as the dedicator of the statue may even be interpreted as an action bywhich Piero meant to disrupt association of the garden with his father and direct ittoward himself. The inscription reads: 'Petrus Medices Cos. Fi. libertati simul etfortitudinihanc mulieris statuam quo cives invicto constantique animo ad rem pub. redderent dedicavit',('Piero Son ofCosimo Medici had dedicated the statue ofthis woman to that liberty andfortitude bestowed on the republic by the invincible and constant spirit of the citizens")See H. W. JANSON, The Sculpture of Donatello (Princeton, NJ, 1963), p. 198ff. for itssource, dating and further interpretation.

The Judith and Holofernes group has been interpreted as being commemorative ofvarious specific events in Florentine history. See A. FRANCIONI, Elogio di DonatelloScultore (Florence, 1837), pp. 34--36; H. SEMPER, Donatello Leben und Werke (lnnsbruck,1887), p. 69; A. PARRONCHI, Donatello e il Potere (Florence and Bologna, 1980), pp. 237­241. These interpretations present the statue as a passive monument. In this essay, I ammore interested in how the statue and its setting actively created a politicalenvironment.

7. l. HYMAN, Fifteenth Century Florentine Studies: The Palazzo Medici and a Ledger jor theChurch of San Lorenzo (New York and London, 1977), p. 186; H. SAALMAN andP. MAITOX, 'The first Medici palace', Journal ofthe Society ofArchitectural Historians, 44(1985), p. 329. By no means do I wish to present the garden as having entirely ritual and

266 MATTHEW G. LOOPER

political functions. It is possible that products from the garden would have been usedfor medicine or food by the household, and the position ofa loggia in the south end ofthe garden strongly suggests that it was used in the summer as a place in which thefamily could have taken air in the shade.

8. R. A. GOLDTHWAITE, 'The Florentine palace as domestic architecture', The AmericanHistorical Review, 77 (1972), p. 985.

9. E. BAITISTI, 'Natura artificiosa to natura artificialis', in The Italian Garden, D. R. Coffin(ed.) (Washington, DC, 1972), p. 10.

10. B. PREYER, 'The Rucellai palace', in Giovanni Rucellai ed il suo Zibaldone II. A FlorentinePatrician and his Palace (London, 1981), pp. 164, 174.

11. SAALMAN and MAITOX (note 7), pp. 329-345.12. A 1432 contract (cited in R. A. GOLDTHWAITE, The Building ofRenaissance Florence. An

Economic and Social History (Baltimore, MD, 1980), p. 135) between Cosimo andLorenzo de' Medici and two builders is for the construction of about 1000 braccia ofgarden wall, probably for the old palace garden.

13. These doorways are also mentioned in the account ofthe 1469 wedding ofLorenzo de'Medici. See J. Ross, Lives of the Early Medici as Told in their Correspondence (London,1910), p. 130.

14. See A. LINAKER, I. Restauri del Palazzo Mediceo Riccardi (ext. from Atti SocieteColumbaria 191~14) (Florence, 1915).

15. Researchers found remains of the original columns and arches of the loggia underseventeenth-century structures.

16. Ross (note 13), p. 130.17. G. THIEM,and C. THIEM, 'Toskanische FassadenDekoration in Sgrtiffito und Fresko 14 bis 17

Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1964), p. 62.18. LINAKER (note 14), pp. 10--11.19. Ross (note B), p. 130.20. A poem, De religione et magnificentia Cosmi Medicis, by Alberto Avogadro da Vercelli in

10. LAMIUS, Deliciae Eruditorum, XII (Florence, 1742), pp. 117-149, mentions thattopiary was found in the Medici garden, including images of elephants, a wild boar, aship, a ram, a hare, a wolffleeing from dogs, and a deer. While BAITISTI (note 9), pp. 16­17, has no qualms about the factual nature ofAvogadro's list, I agree with R. HATFIELD,'Some unknown descriptions ofthe Medici palace in 1459', The Art Bulletin, 52 (1970),p. 235, in thinking that the poem is more concerned with the evocation ofa mood thanwith listing actual components of the garden. An actual description of fifteenth-centurytopiary is in Giovanni Rucellai's writings on his villa at Quaracchi in A. PEROSA (ed.),Giovanni Rucellai ed il suo Zibaldone, 1(11 zibaldone quaresimale) (London, 1960), p. 21 if.On the sources for Avogadro's poem, see GOMBRICH (note 2), pp. 44--45 and 145,note 39; and E. H. GOMBRICH, 'Alberto Avogadro's descriptions of the Badia ofFiesoleand the villa ofCareggi', Italia Medioevale e Umanistica, 5 (1962), pp. 217-229.

21. HATFIELD (note 20), p. 233.22. In addition to HYMAN'S (note 37), p. 186, evidence for the central location of the

fountain, one must also consider that during the 1469 wedding, tables for drinks werearranged in central locations in the courtyard and garden. In the courtyard, the bronzeDavid was at the centrepoint; the implication is that in the garden, the fountain was alsoat the centre. See Ross (note 13), p. 131.

For proof of the presence of the Judith and Holofernes in the garden, see JANSON(note 6), p. 198 if. While Janson believes that the group was originally commissioned

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

for a Sienese patron, G. CORTIand F. HARTT, 'New documents concerning Donatello,Luca and Andrea della Robbia, Desiderio, Mino, Uccello, Pollaiuolo, Filippo Lippi,Baldovinetti, and others', The Art Bulletin, 44(2) (1962), pp. 158-159, argue that it was aMedici commission originally. J. POPE-HENNESSY, Italian Renaissance Sculpture (NewYork, 1985; originally London, 1958), p. 265, and GOMBRICH, (note 2), p. 46, link thegroup to Cosimo, but V. HERZNER, 'Die "Judith" der Medici', Zeitschrift JurKunstgeschichte,43 (1980), pp. 175-180, sees the work as Piero's commission. A recentanalysis of these opinions is found in A. NATALI, (Exemplum salutis publicae', inDonatello e il Restauro della Giuditta (Florence, 1988), pp. 19-32.

Other fountains have been cited as being in the Medici Palace garden. BATTISTI (note9), pp. 18-19 believes that the Medici fountain, now in the Pitti Palace, was placed in agrotto in the Medici garden. A statement by G. VASARI, Le Opere, 111, G. Milanesi (ed.),9 volumes (Florence, 1976/1906), pp. 93-94, cites what is probably a different fountain:'Fecenel palazzo de' Medici la fontanadi marmocheenel secondo cortile; nella quale sono alcuni

Janciul/i che sbarrano delfini che gettano acqua, ed efin ita con somma grazia e con manieradiligentissima'. Verrocchio's Putto with a Dolphin graced another fountain that waslocated in the Medici palace, but it was probably originally made for the villa atCareggi. See BATTISTI (note 9), p. 19, note 40, and the document published inM. CRUTIWELL, Verrocchio (London, 1904), p. 242 If. Judging from style, I can placenone of these objects before 1464. The classical sculptures in the garden cited by F.ALBERTINI, Memoriale di Molte Statue e Pitture della Citta di Firenze (Florence, 1863), p. 7,and others were probably part of Lorenzo de' Medici's collection.

23. See JANSON (note 6), p. 198 ff., for the sources of this inscription.24. B. HARRIS WILES, The Fountains oJFlorentine Sculptorsand their Followersfrom Donatello to

Bernini (Cambridge, 1933), p. 12. The documents relating to the granite basin arecollated in WILES, p. 110. This basin was evidently left in the garden after theJudith andHolofernes group was removed by the Signoria in 1495.

25. SAALMAN and MATTOX (note 7), p. 329, put the move-in date at no later than 1458, andPREYER (note 10), p. 183, posits that the palace may have been occupied by 1456.

26. HATFIELD (note 20), p. 236.27. F. W. KENT, 'Palaces, politics and society in fifteenth-century Florence', 1 Tatti Studies, 2

(1987), p. 58 ff.28. R. A. GOLDTHWAITE (note 8), p. l004ff.29. TREXLER (note 1), p. 425.30. See BRUCKER (note 5), pp. 43-44, 46-47, on the traditions ofleaving Florence during

times ofcrisis or in the summer. L. BATTISTA ALBERTI, The Family in Renaissance Florence(Della Famiglia), R. Watkins (trans.) (Columbia, SC 1969), pp. 192-193, gives a verypersonal account of the joys of the countryside.

31. The hanging gallery may also have been constructed partly for security reasons. Unlikethe gallery ofthe Ducal Palace at Urbino, the Medici gallery does not connect rooms ofdifferent wings.

32. LINAKER (note 14), p. 10.33. H. KAUFFMANN, Donatello. Eine EinJuhrung in sein Bilden und Denken (Berlin, 1935),

p.167.34. KAUFFMANN (note 33), p. 167.35. On the ambiguity of gardens, see A. BARTLETT GIAMATTI, The Earthly Paradise and the

Renaissance Epic (Princeton, NJ, 1966); T. COMITO, The Idea oj the Garden in theRenaissance (New Brunswick, NJ, 1978), p.I72.

36. On botanical symbols of good and evil, see A. KATZENELLENBOGEN, Allegories oj theVirtues and Vices in Medieval Art from Early Christian Times to the Thirteenth Century(New York, 1964), p. 63 ff; D. W. ROBERTSON, JR, 'The doctrine ofcharity in medievalliterary gardens: a topical approach through symbolism and allegory', Speculum, 26(1951), pp. 26-27.

37. P. F. WATSON, The Garden oJLove in Tuscan Art oJthe Early Renaissance (Philadelphia,1979), pp. 30-31; GIAMATTI (note 35), pp. 125-126.

38. WATSON (note 37), p. 30.39. See WATSON (note 37), especially pp. 52-75.40. See COMITO (note 35), pp. 89-147.41. WATSON (note 37), pp. 70-71.42. For my translations of Dante, I rely on Dorothy Sayers' volumes: DANTE AUGHIERI,

The Comedy oj Dante Alighieri the Florentine. Cantica 11 Purgatory (II Purgatorio), D. L.Sayers (trans.), (London, 1955); and DANTE ALIGHIERI, The Comedy ofDante Alighieri theFlorentine. Cantica 111 Paradise (II Paradisio), D. L. Sayers and B. Reynolds (trans.)(London, 1962).

43. See B. E. DALEY, 'The "closed garden" and the "sealed fountain": Song of Songs 4:12in the late medieval iconography of Mary', in The Medieval Garden, E. B. MacDougall(ed.) (Washington, DC, 1986).

44. KAUFFMANN (note 33), p. 168. The interpretation of Judith's medieval heritage isexpanded by HERZNER (note 22).

45. H. MARTIN VON ERFFA, 'Judith-Virtus Virtutum-Maria', Mitteilungen des Kunsthistoris­chen Institutes in Florenz, 14 (1970), pp. 460-465.

46. E. WIND, 'Donatello'sJudith: a symbol ofsanctimonia',Journal oJthe Warburg Institute,1 (1937-1938), pp. 62-63.

47. KAUFFMANN (note 33), pp. 169-170.48. F. HARTT, Donatello. Prophet oj Modern Vision (New York, 1972), p. 408.49. See GIAMATTI (note 35) for an extensive history of the word 'Paradise'.50. COMITO (note 35), p. 33.51. For an illustration ofthe Mystical Paradise, see KATZENELLENBOGEN (note 36), figure 68.52. BEK (note 4), p. 38.53. HATFIELD (note 20), p. 234.54. See HATFIELD (note 20), p. 233.55. Ambrose andJohn Chrysostom, following Clement and Origen, had long equated the

Earthly Paradise and Heavenly Jerusalem. See GIAMATTI (note 35), pp. 14-15.56. HATFIELD (note 20), p. 233.57. HATFIELD (note 20), p. 233.58. HATFIELD (note 20), p. 234.59. VESPASIANO DA BISTICCI, Renaissance Princes, Popes, and Prelates, W. George and E.

Waters (trans.) (New York, 1963), pp. 224-225.60. C. W. WESTFALL, In this Most Perfect Paradise; Alberti, Nicholas V, and the Invention oj

Conscious Urban Planning in Rome 1447-55 (University Park and London, 1974),pp. 154-156.

61. WESTFALL (note 60), p. 158; WATSON (note 37), p. 80.62. On Hesdin, see A. HAGIOPAN VAN BUREN, 'Reality and literary romance in the park of

Hesdin', in The Medieval Garden, E. B. MacDougall (ed.) (Washington, DC, 1986),especially pp. 123-124, on the English visit.

267

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

63. T. MAGNUSON, Studies in Roman QuattrocentoArchitecture (Stockholm, 1958), p. 107. It isalso important that during the Schism, Clement VI had his apartments at Avignonfilled with the greenery of Paradise. See BEK (note 4), p. 38.

64. WESTFALL (note 60), p. 148.65. WESTFALL (note 60), p. 148.66. WESTFALL (note 60), p. 147.67. WESTFALL (note 60), p. 149.68. WESTFALL (note 60), p. 155.69. The presence ofdiverse animals in gardens seems to have been as much a diagnostic ofa

Paradise garden as the fountain or wall. PIUS II, 'The commentaries of Pius II, BookXI', (trans.) F. Alden Gragg, with notes by L. C. Gabel, Smith College Studies inHistory, 43 (1957), p. 759, notes that the garden of the patriarch of Aquileia, LodovicoScarampo, contained 'peacocks and pheasants and goats from Syria with very long earshanging down and covering their cheeks'. Similarly, the Paradise garden in theDecameton reverberated with the sounds of 'some twenty different kinds of birds' and'was liberally stocked with as many as a hundred different varieties of perfectlycharming animals'. See G. BOCCACCIO, The Decameron, G. H. McWilliam (trans.)(London, 1972), p. 233.

268 MAlTHEW G. LOOPER

70. VESPASIANO DA BISTICCI (note 59), p. 225.71. CARROLL WILLIAM WESTFALL, 'Chivalric declaration: The Palazzo Ducale in Urbino as

a political statement', in Art and Architecture in the Service ofPolitics, H. A. Millon andL. Nochlin (eds.) (Cambridge, MA, 1978), p. 38 ff.

72. VESPASIANO DA BISTICCI (note 59), p. 108.73. C. R. MACK, Pienza. The Creation ofaRenaissance City (Ithaca, NY, and London, 1979),

p. 59, believes that the perforations are not original. Pius' description of the viewswithin the garden is consistent with this interpretation. See PIUSII, 'The commentariesofPius II, Book IX', F. Alden Gragg (trans.) with notes by L. C. Gabel, Smith CollegeStudies in History, 35 (1951), p. 600.

74. HATFIELD (note 20), p. 233.75. JANSON (note 6), p. 203; GOMBRICH (note 2), p. 41; BATTISTI (note 9), p. 18.76. For an illustration of the arbor mala, see KATZENELLENBOGEN (note 36), figure 66.77. See WATSON, (note 37), pp. 43--51.78. See COMITO (note 35), pp. 14-15; M. AGNELLI, Gardens ofthe Italian Villas (New York,

1987), pp. 30-31. Vasari's description and interpretation are in G. V ASARI, Le Opere, VI,G. Milanesi (ed.), 9 volumes (Florence, 1973/1906), p. 72 ff.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Prin

ceto

n U

nive

rsity

] at

12:

24 1

1 N

ovem

ber

2014