Bad Habit: Scipione Borghese, Wignacourt, and the Problem of Cigoli's Knighthood (2006)

24
207 I n the church of San Giovanni dei Fiorentini in Rome, installed on the fourth pier along the left side of the nave, is a handsome 19 th -century marble memorial to the most famous painter of the Florentine baroque, Lodovico Cardi, il Cigoli (Fig. 1). Born on 21 September 1559 in Castelvecchio di Cigoli to a family with claims to noble origins, 1 Cigoli was a gifted draftsman, altarpiece painter, and architect who spent most of the last nine years of his life in the Eternal City. There he worked primarily for the Borghese family, completing major commissions at St Peter’s, Santa Maria Maggiore, and Palazzo Borghese on the Quirinal. 2 He died unexpectedly in Rome on 8 June 1613. His death plays a significant role in the story we are about to tell, which investigates how it was that Cigoli, who never visited Malta or worked for the Knights, became, as the plaque proudly records, ‘Equiti Hierosolymitano’. 3 Cigoli’s membership in the Order of St John is also celebrated in two fine pictures based on the painter’s Self-Portrait of 1606-7 in the Uffizi. 4 Both works insert an element absent in the original: the eight-pointed cross of the Sacra Religione. Hanging from a ribbon around his neck, the cross rests on the painter’s chest just above his left hand, which holds the instruments of the art of painting and architecture. The first of these hommages, by Cigoli’s student Sigismondo Coccapani, is preserved in Chambéry, Musée des Beaux-Arts, and has been dated as early as c. 1613. 5 A lost drawing by Coccapani, probably based on his Chambéry canvas (or perhaps a study for it), is reproduced in reverse in a print of 1644 by Bernardino Curti, which displays the cross of the Order in the cartouche above the figure (Fig. 2). 6 The second canvas, with its headline announcing that Cigoli was ‘Eletto Cavaliere Hierosolimitano’, was made by Domenico di Raffaello Peruzzi for the Accademia del Disegno in Florence (Fig. 3). 7 The picture, which is now in the Uffizi, relies heavily on Cigoli’s Self Portrait, though the hat has been modified. 8 Cigoli is similarly hailed for his knightly credentials on the frontispiece of his influential treatise, the Prospettiva Pratica (Fig. 4). 9 The plaque, portraits and frontispiece seem perfectly straightforward. No one would suspect what can now be demonstrated from recently discovered documents, namely that Cigoli – as far as Grand Master Alof de Wignacourt was concerned – did not deserve a knighthood. Indeed, the Grand Master Bad Habit: Scipione Borghese, Wignacourt, and the Problem of Cigoli’s Knighthood David M. Stone Fig. 1 Memorial Plaque to Lodovico Cigoli Fig. 2 Bernardino Curti after S. Coccapani, Portrait of Cigoli as a Knight of Malta David M. Stone, “Bad Habit: Scipione Borghese, Wignacourt, and the Problem of Cigoli’s Knighthood,” in Celebratio Amicitiae, Essays in honour of Giovanni Bonello, ed. M. Camilleri and T. Vella, Malta: Fondazzjoni Patrimonju Malti, 2006, pp. 207-229.

Transcript of Bad Habit: Scipione Borghese, Wignacourt, and the Problem of Cigoli's Knighthood (2006)

207

In the church of San Giovanni dei Fiorentini in Rome, installed on the fourth pier along the left side of the nave, is a handsome 19th-century marble memorial to the most famous painter of the Florentine baroque, Lodovico

Cardi, il Cigoli (Fig. 1). Born on 21 September 1559 in Castelvecchio di Cigoli to a family with claims to noble origins,1 Cigoli was a gifted draftsman, altarpiece painter, and architect who spent most of the last nine years of his life in the Eternal City. There he worked primarily for the Borghese family, completing major commissions at St Peter’s, Santa Maria Maggiore, and Palazzo Borghese on the Quirinal.2 He died unexpectedly in Rome on 8 June 1613. His death plays a significant role in the story we are about to tell, which investigates how it was that Cigoli, who never visited Malta or worked for the Knights, became, as the plaque proudly records, ‘Equiti Hierosolymitano’.3

Cigoli’s membership in the Order of St John is also celebrated in two fine pictures based on the painter’s Self-Portrait of 1606-7 in the Uffizi.4 Both works insert an element absent in the original: the eight-pointed cross of the Sacra Religione. Hanging from a ribbon around his neck, the cross rests on the painter’s chest just above his left hand, which holds the instruments of the art of painting and architecture. The first of these hommages, by Cigoli’s student Sigismondo Coccapani, is preserved in Chambéry, Musée des Beaux-Arts, and has been dated as early as c. 1613.5 A lost drawing by Coccapani, probably based on his Chambéry canvas (or perhaps a study for it), is reproduced in reverse in a print of 1644 by Bernardino Curti, which displays the cross of the Order in the cartouche above the figure (Fig. 2).6 The second canvas, with its headline announcing that Cigoli was ‘Eletto Cavaliere Hierosolimitano’, was made by Domenico di Raffaello Peruzzi for the Accademia del Disegno in Florence (Fig. 3).7 The picture, which is now in the Uffizi, relies heavily on Cigoli’s Self Portrait, though the hat has been modified.8 Cigoli is similarly hailed for his knightly credentials on the frontispiece of his influential treatise, the Prospettiva Pratica (Fig. 4).9

The plaque, portraits and frontispiece seem perfectly straightforward. No one would suspect what can now be demonstrated from recently discovered documents, namely that Cigoli – as far as Grand Master Alof de Wignacourt was concerned – did not deserve a knighthood. Indeed, the Grand Master

Bad Habit: Scipione Borghese, Wignacourt, and the Problem of Cigoli’s Knighthood

David M. Stone

Fig. 1 Memorial Plaque to Lodovico Cigoli

Fig. 2 Bernardino Curti after S. Coccapani, Portrait of Cigoli as a Knight of Malta

David M. Stone, “Bad Habit: Scipione Borghese, Wignacourt, and the Problem of Cigoli’s Knighthood,” in Celebratio Amicitiae, Essays in honour of Giovanni Bonello, ed. M. Camilleri and T. Vella, Malta: Fondazzjoni Patrimonju Malti, 2006, pp. 207-229.

208

did everything he reasonably could to prevent the title from being conferred. But worn down from a nearly year-long siege mounted by a determined Cardinal Scipione Borghese (Fig. 5), acting together with his uncle Pope Paul V, Wignacourt eventually capitulated. In the end, ironically, the Grand Master (Fig. 6) was given a stay of ‘execution’ by none other than Death himself, as Cigoli expired before being installed as a knight.

A brief and rather rosy account of the circumstances of Cigoli’s knighthood is provided by the most important early biography on the artist, written in c. 1628 by his nephew Giovanni Battista Cardi.10 Published for the first time in 1913, Cardi’s vita was known in manuscript to most of the later Seicento biographers, who largely repeated what he had to say on the subject of the Malta episode.11 Cardi explains how wishing to honour the artist for his excellent work, including what was to be the Florentine’s last major project, the Psyche frescoes in the garden loggetta at Palazzo Borghese (Palazzo Rospigliosi-Pallavicini),12 the Borghese family asked Wignacourt to make Cigoli a knight:

Et havendo data fine à quest’opera con molto suo gusto, venne ancora a ricever compimento il favore di Paolo V e del Card. Borghese fattoli appresso il G. Mastro di Malta, il quale accettandolo nel numero de Fratelli Militari di quel Convento rispose in questa guisa: Frater Alofius de Wignacourt . . . [what follows next in Cardi’s text is a full transcription of Wignacourt’s Magistral Bull of 30 April 1613: see Appendix, Doc. 15]. Questo fù onore veramente segnalato, e cosi singolare, che al incontro meritato dal Cigoli, è da mettersi in dubbio se di maggior lode sia da reputarsi degno egli, che fù di tanto merito, od’il Cardinal Borghese, che riconoscendo la bontà e virtù sue, e stimandole tali, ch’elle rendessero quello risplendente di somma nobiltà, lo volse con manifesto contrasegno publicare al mondo. Atto per certo di generoso Principe, il quale come quasi presago di quello che sopravastava non volse tralasciar d’onorar gl’ultimi sua giorni. Poi che arrivate le lettere del G. Mastro in Roma, egli subito si ammalò di febbre maligna, et il decimo quarto giorno di quella passò a miglior vita a di otto di Giugno nel 1613 di anni cinquantadua . . . .13

The nearly complete record of correspondence assembled in the Appendix makes it possible for the first time to witness the diplomatic rituals Wignacourt and Borghese enacted as each tested the limits of his own power in the Cigoli negotiations. The brave individual stuck in the middle of this tug-of-war was the Knights’ Ambassador to the Holy See, Fra Niccolò de la Marra,14 who wrote to the Grand Master on 7 July 1612 what appears to be the very first letter on the subject.

This initial message (Doc. 1) is mostly illegible due to ink damage, but some words can be made out with certainty. From the context provided by later missives, the letter seems to say that Cardinal Borghese wants the Grand Master to give an ‘Habito di Devotione ad un gentilluomo dallo stato del Gran Duca’. It can also be surmised from the letter, that already by the time of this first exchange, La Marra had explained to Borghese that the title of Habit of Devotion, given by Magistral grace, had been banned by the Capitolo Generale (of 1612) and thus would require from the pope ‘un Breve facoltativo’.15 The name and occupation of the Tuscan applicant are not mentioned by La Marra. As we shall see, the Grand Master was offended when he later found out whom he was to honour.

It is interesting that the same strange omission of names had also occurred in the Caravaggio case in 1607–8. There the situation was essentially

209

reversed: the person asking for a favour was Wignacourt; Borghese was the one to concede it.16 Much ink has been spilt on the reasons why Merisi’s name, and the name of a second individual for whom a title was also requested,17 were not mentioned in the letters sent to the Order’s Ambassador and agente in Rome. For example, some scholars have speculated that Caravaggio’s name could have been withheld to save the pope embarrassment, since the painter was wanted by the papacy for fleeing Rome after the 1606 murder of Tomassoni. But it appears to me, in light of the evidence provided by the correspondence of the Cigoli affair, that such omissions of names were simply part of a well-established etiquette. The favour was first worked out – in principle – and then at a later stage, the details were filled in. In the case of Caravaggio, there were, as we know, no problems whatsoever during the process. The pope granted a Brief for Caravaggio almost immediately, allowing the painter to take the habit despite the Statute prohibiting murderers from entering the Order.18 A second waiver was included, allowing the Grand Master to confer an ‘abito di Obbedienza Magistrale’ on Caravaggio even though such titles had been banned by Wignacourt’s Chapter General of 1604.

The Habit of Devotion Cardinal Borghese sought for Cigoli was a more prestigious version of the Habit of Obedience given to Caravaggio. Though further research is needed on this subject, it seems that the Habit of Devotion was rather rare. Caravita’s 1718 commentary on the Borgo Nuovo Statutes gives us some guidance, but the rules could have changed after 1612.19 He notes the following with regard to the Passaggio20 charged for these two types of honorary knighthoods: ‘Passaggio dei Cavalieri di divotione è di Scudi quattro milla d’oro di Tarì quatordeci. Mà i Principi assoluti non lo pagano (Ord. 13. Ricev.). Passaggio

Fig. 3 Domenico di Raffaello Peruzzi, Portrait of Cigoli as a Knight of Malta

210

dei Cavalieri e Capellani Magistrali è di Scudi cento d’oro di Tarì quatordeci (Ord. 14. ricev.). Accresciuti à Scudi duecento simili. (Conf. 26 Maggio 1680)’.21 Thus, in 1718, the fee for non-Princes to acquire an ‘abito di Divotione’ (4,000 scudi) was twenty times the going rate of a mere ‘abito di Cavaliere Magistrale’ (200 scudi).22

Since the Habit of Devotion was the type of honorary knighthood given to ‘Principi Assoluti’ (who were exempt from the fees) and others with large purses, it was probably a title reserved for nobles who did not want to become full-fledged Cavalieri di Giustizia (with duties to reside in Convent and to perform caravans). None of the letters in the Cigoli case mentions the amount of the Passaggio the Tuscan’s habit would have required. They are also silent on the question of who would have footed the bill.23

Returning again to La Marra’s 7 July 1612 letter (Doc. 1), it should be noted that the last line reveals an aspect of the protocol that existed in this period between an ambassador and heads of state. La Marra needs to prove to the Cardinal that he is actively pursuing the knighthood, and wants Wignacourt to provide a formal letter that could actually be shown. He asks Wignacourt: ‘Che al presente m’occorre di V.S. Ill.ma . . . far gratia à me di rispondere una lettera mostrabile, affinche io possa effetiva, et efficacemente mostrar d’haver’ obbedito’. The Grand Master often makes it clear in his letters to the Ambassador which documents are for him to keep secret and act upon with discretion, and which are intentionally written to be read out loud or delivered.24

On 11 August, La Marra sends another dispatch (Doc. 2) to Malta, noting that, even though he had explained to Borghese that the original message of 7 July had by now probably not even arrived on the island, the Cardinal was nonetheless pushing him hard for an answer. La Marra remarks that Scipione promises never again to approach the Grand Master for such habits: ‘che mi dava parola che mai più costatarla [?] per simili Habiti, perche niuno gli premava mai come questo’.

Wignacourt finally responds to La Marra’s two letters on 8 September 1612 (Doc. 3). He stresses that it will be necessary to have a Brief from the pope, one which not only provides a waiver but which directly names the person being honoured and guarantees his worthiness.

The impatient Scipione now puts renewed pressure on La Marra and the Order at an Audience on the morning of 21 September. The next day, 22 September 1612, the Ambassador corresponds with Wignacourt (Doc. 4) to say that Scipione, even though he has not yet received a response from Malta to the initial request, is going to have the papal Breve prepared and sent to the Convent anyway to save time, ‘per non differirla più lungo tempo’. As we learn from La Marra’s letter of 13 October (Doc. 5), by the morning of 12 October, date of another Audience, Wignacourt’s missive of 8 September (Doc. 3) has already arrived in Rome and has met with the ‘infinito contento’ of the Cardinal.

On 27 October (Doc. 6), La Marra informs the Grand Master that with his dispatch he is sending along a letter from Cardinal Borghese (Doc. 6a) as well as the papal Brief itself (Doc. 6b). It is now obvious that on 21 September, Scipione had been merely bluffing; he did not stoop to the depths of rudeness and preemptively send the Brief to the Grand Master before the latter had agreed to concede a grazia. The person proposed for receiving a knighthood in these documents is ‘dignissima’, remarks La Marra quoting Scipione. Obviously the Ambassador knows well Wignacourt’s concern to maintain the reputation of the Order. Unfortunately, their letters cross somewhere over the Mediterranean,

211

and four days later, on 31 October (Doc. 7), Wignacourt sends La Marra a dispatch complaining that no Brief has appeared.

Meanwhile, poor Cigoli has no doubt been waiting anxiously for news of the great reward his patron has been attempting to secure for him since the beginning of July. From an important letter of 3 November 1612 the painter sent from Rome to his close friend Galileo in Florence, we may infer that Borghese has tried to reassure his Apelles by invoking the oldest excuse in the book to explain the long delay – la posta italiana 25:

Quanto alla nuova pervenuta di me costà, è la istessa per Roma et non è del tutto vana, ma non le ne davo conto per non essere ancora conclusa; il che sarebbe, se non che, avendo io nepoti, ò volsuto alcune condizioni di libertà, le quali non potendo dare il Gran Maestro, è convenuto il breve di Sua Santità per darli tale autorità; et il Sig.r Cardinale Borgese l’à mandato con sue lettere molto favorevoli; et perchè le prime andorno male alla posta, lui a bocca l’à racomandate allo imbasciatore qui di Malta, et allui mandatole. Lui è lo autore, sollecitatore; et l’à voluto fare con il consenso del Gran Maestro, perchè di quelli fatti dal Papa ne à fatto la Religione tal volta qualche romore. Ora ci è il placet del Papa e del Gran Maestro; ma perchè le lettere stanno, fra lo andare e tornare, vicino a tre mesi, nel qual tempo può succedere varii accidenti, perciò non ne avevo dato conto a V.S. et al Sig.r Amadori; al quale se non scrivo, è perchè, non avendo altro che parole non necessarie, mi parebbe di far torto a tanta vechia amicizia. Io sto bene et allegro, e non senza disgusto de’ mia nemici, sentendo e veggendo andare le cose contrarie al loro desiderio, et dello affrescho ancho a canbiare oppinione che io non sapesse dipigniere; anzi dicano pur di quelli alcuni, che le paiono fatte a olio. Io fo la gatta morta, fingo di non sapere nulla, e rido drento.26

Cigoli refers to several important elements related to the ongoing saga of his knighthood. The first is the problem of seeing to the financial well-being of his nephews. He wants ‘condizioni di libertà’ that the Grand Master cannot give him without a papal Brief. This special request is made clear to Wignacourt on 23 February 1613 in an untraced letter from La Marra27 stating that Cigoli wants the privilege – prohibited by the Statutes – to leave a will (‘la licenza di poter testare’).28 The second is the rather humourous (under)statement that the pope needs to consult Wignacourt before making Cigoli a knight. As the painter correctly points out to the astronomer, the Sacra Religione has protested cases where, contrary to the ‘Privilegi’ of the Order, the papacy bypassed the Convent and directly conferred knighthoods.

The third and most significant remark is a reference to the scandal of the Immacolata cupola, frescoed in 1610-12 by Cigoli in the Pauline Chapel at Santa Maria Maggiore (Fig. 7). The critique was not that Cigoli had shown the moon under the Virgin’s feet as the cratered, imperfect, earth-like orb seen in Galileo’s telescope.29 Instead, the problem was aesthetic. Invidious enemies, probably including the painters who were snubbed for the commission, lodged complaints against Cigoli’s ability to draw (there are foreshortening infelicities) and to fresco properly.30 But Cigoli is happy (no doubt because he is confident the knighthood is coming) and pretends not to be bothered (‘Io fo la gatta morta . . . ’), much to the disgust of his detractors.

In light of the broader implications of the scandal, it could be hypothesised that the interest of the Borghese family in making Cigoli a Knight of Malta was not solely to honour him for all his work but also to protect their own reputations

Fig. 4 Ludovico Cigoli, Prospettiva pratica

212

– as patrons of the Cappella Paolina. Of course, the papacy had a long traditionof securing knighthoods – from a variety of Catholic Orders – for its favourite artists and architects, ennobling them and raising their status in Roman society.31 The Vatican no doubt also sought thereby to fashion itself as an enlightened court surrounded by educated courtier-artists. Thus, there may have been no specific ulterior motive in the Cigoli case, even if the timing of the first letters to Wignacourt looks suspicious.

Along these same lines, it would be interesting to know why the Order of St John was tapped for Cigoli’s knighthood and not some other institution. Certainly the Knights of Malta in this period were the most powerful of all the chivalric orders and among the hardest from which to extract a membership for a non-noble. The decision, to be sure, was not made casually. I suspect Cigoli himself played a large role in the choice to obtain the Cross of Malta, since it can be easily shown that he had personal ties to the Sacra Religione. He was a close friend of the Knight and amateur architect Fra Francesco Buonarroti and his brother Michelangelo il Giovane, the famous poet and playwright. The Buonarroti brothers’ nephew, Lionardo Barducci, was a page of Grand Master Wignacourt.32 Cigoli, Francesco, and Michelangelo organized a ceremony to open the tomb of the brothers’ great uncle, Michelangelo il Vecchio (the painter of the Sistine Ceiling) on 2 January 1607 in Santa Croce in Florence. Cigoli removed Michelangelo’s belt, which he kept as a ‘relic’, according to Fra Francesco. Present also at the exhumation was another Knight of Malta, Fra Giovanvincenzo del Signor Gino Ginori.33 Perhaps these relationships made Cigoli desire a knighthood long before he painted the Cappella Paolina.

Fig. 5 Anonymous, Portrait of Cardinal Scipione Borghese

213

Cigoli’s letter to Galileo was written on 3 November. Over a month goes by before, on 9 December 1612 (Doc. 8), Wignacourt is pleased to report that with the latest post, the papal ‘Breve facoltativo’ and Borghese’s letter have at last reached the island. He now knows the name of the individual so insistently recommended by the Borghese family: ‘Ludovico Civoli fiorentino’. But he seems still in the dark about his profession.

But later that same day, 9 December, as a second letter from Wignacourt attests (Doc. 9), an unexpected problem has surfaced. Vice Chancellor Giovanni Ottone Bosio has discovered a bad clause in the Brief, which, if honoured, would not only deprive Cigoli of the standard exemptions and privileges accorded all Knights with regard to protection from secular tribunals (errant members are normally to be handed over to the Sguardium of the Order), but all other Knights of Devotion, past and future, would be so deprived. The offending clause makes reference to a ‘constitutione’ written by Clement VIII. No one in Malta has heard of it. La Marra is asked to research the issue and to provide a copy or summary of the original document. The Ambassador is also instructed to tell the Cardinal that Wignacourt has put everything on hold. The Grand Master wishes to know whether Borghese still wants to go ahead with the defective Brief or whether he intends to send a new, corrected one, as the Frenchman recommends. Wignacourt sends along an attachment: a copy of the Brief with the bad clause underlined. That same day he posts a letter directly to Borghese (Doc. 10) informing him of the general problem, but leaving the specifics for La Marra to explain.

From a letter sent by Wignacourt to La Marra on 8 March (Doc. 12), probably in response to an untraced dispatch of January or early February, we

Fig. 6 Philippe Thomassin, Portrait of Alof de Wignacourt

214

learn that Alof is extremely happy with what La Marra has told the Cardinal à propos of Cigoli, whom the Grand Master now calls ‘pittore’ for the first time. It seems that Wignacourt had some weeks earlier asked La Marra to try to urge Scipione to persuade Cigoli to settle for an ‘habito di Cavaliere Magistrale’ instead of the Habit of Devotion. Wignacourt now wants La Marra to use all his ‘destrezza’ to get this downgrade accomplished. The Grand Master is displeased that the Clement VIII motuproprio cannot be found; he asks La Marra to communicate the problem to the Vice Chancellor’s brother, the historian and agente Giacomo Bosio, to see if he can hunt it down.

Writing on 8 March, Wignacourt was unaware that La Marra had already gotten the job done. Two weeks earlier, on 23 February, the Ambassador had met with Borghese and had learned, ‘che finalmente il Civoli si era resoluto a contentarsi di un habito Magistrale ma che però segli dia ancora la licenza di poter testare’.34 The papal Brief was prepared accordingly on 2 March 1613 (Doc. 11), though it did not arrive in Malta until much later.35

By the middle of April, having heard nothing, La Marra has become concerned. On 13 April (Doc. 14), he writes to the Grand Master to ask him to apply all due speed in sending to Rome the grazia and the licence to leave a will ‘che il detto Civoli hà richiesto’. He also reports that the motuproprio cannot be found by anyone.

* * *

A small explosion should have been audible to those gathered in the courtyard of the Magistral Palace on or just before the last day of April. For by that date, the papal Brief of 2 March (Doc. 11) had arrived, containing details about Cigoli that utterly rattled the otherwise unflappable Wignacourt. Cigoli, the Breve records, owed two thousand scudi to his relatives: ‘in summa duorum millium scutorum monitam pro quibusdam consanguineis suis reperitur dictis’.36 The Order eschewed debtors – not only for reasons of decorum, but because it was against the Statutes. Creditors could ultimately file suit against the Convent after a Knight’s death to get their money.

On 30 April 1613, Wignacourt, no doubt gnashing his teeth, sends the Brief to the Cancelleria and commands that a Magistral Bull (Doc. 15) making Cigoli a Knight of Magistral Obedience be drafted. At the same moment he writes a long, unusually vituperative letter to La Marra (Doc. 16). This document conveys, more than any other letter I have read by the Grand Master, the kind of frustration he felt being endlessly pushed and prodded by Borghese to give favours to the Cardinal’s friends – favours he believed did not benefit the Order of St John.

The Grand Master begins his letter (Doc. 16), bitterly observing that Cigoli’s habit, according to the Brief, is to be granted ‘fuori convento’ – quite unlike Caravaggio’s knighthood, which was earned the proper way, in residence in Malta, with one full year of service to the Order. And he notes the Florentine’s debt of two thousand scudi.37

He then goes on to ask La Marra to instruct Borghese to show more respect for the reputation and decorum of the Sacra Religione by ceasing to propose people like Cigoli for membership.38 The Cardinal should consider himself served by the mere granting of the grazia, which he should tear up,

215

given how repugnant this situation is to the Order in having to honour Cigoli, who not only is not of the quality promised in the original request but is, in fact, a person of low birth:

la supplichate con molto affetto à nome nostro à degnarsi di farci gratia di haver più mira alla reputatione et decoro di nostra Religione che al gusto di una persona quale il detto Cigoli, et a contentarsi di essere stata obbedita da noi con la concessione di detta gratia, ma di non sene servire in modo alcuno per la repugnanza, che ci interviene per parte del detto Cigoli il quale non solamente non è di quella qualità che da S.S. Illma vi fa detto quando ella vi ordinò che voi ci domandasse detta gratia, mà e persona di basso nascimento.

Wignacourt continues his diatribe, saying that Cigoli is nothing but a common painter, who earns a living by selling his art, and, worse still, is plagued

Fig. 7 Ludovico Cigoli, The Immaculate Virgin

216

by huge debts. Moreover, the Grand Master elaborates using an apt concetto, it is easy to foresee Cigoli, unable to pay his creditors, using his habit as a shield so as to avoid paying. And the day will come when he passes his days in prison, besmirching his habit and the Order:

et Pittore ordinario et che non solamente vive con la mercede che cava dell’arte sua, ma quel che è peggio è aggravato di grossi debiti et si può credere che come inhabile à poterli pagare si voglia fare scudo del detto habito per non li soddisfare, o’ vero si può dubitare che tutto il giorno habbi à stare per le prigioni in grandissimo vilependio di detto habito, et di nostra Religione.

As far as Wignacourt is concerned, the Order has never conferred a grazia on a person aggravated by debt, such problems being routinely ferreted out by the Commissioners during their investigations of the Proofs of Nobility, just as described in the ninth section of the standard questionnaire, for which witnesses are carefully interviewed (in the applicant’s hometown) – a practice from which the Order has never deviated. The Grand Master’s closing instructions to La Marra: ‘Please implore the Cardinal to consider himself served and to have greater regard for the honour of the Order. But as for Cigoli, no doubt the Cardinal will find another way of honouring him’.

Wignacourt’s disparagement of Cigoli’s lineage flies in the face of the biographical tradition of the painter’s noble ancestry (though it is doubtful Cigoli’s bloodlines could have withstood the acid test of the Order’s Prove di Nobiltà). And his attack on the Tuscan’s profession, though consistent with the Knights’ strict rules prohibiting membership to men who practised any sort of trade, does not jibe with the enthusiastic reception given to Caravaggio in Malta in 1607-8. One senses that Wignacourt is exaggerating so as to retaliate against Borghese. It is worth reiterating, however, that Caravaggio (much less a candidate for nobility than Cigoli) had paid homage to the Grand Master by painting his portrait (now in the Louvre) and by making for the Order such masterpieces as the Beheading of St John, situated above the altar of the Oratory attached to the Conventual Church. One wonders if Borghese might have prevented the blow-up if he had sent Wignacourt, along with the initial request for a knighthood, a large painting by Cigoli as a sign of good will. Hiding Cigoli’s profession from the Grand Master was an arrogant strategy that ultimately proved disastrous.

After the exchange of several further letters, some of them crossing in vain,39 La Marra writes on 1 June 1613 (Doc. 21) to say that he has given Scipione the grazia (Doc. 15) and dispatch (Doc. 18) Wignacourt had sent in his care, and has communicated to the Cardinal the import of the two letters sent ‘à parte’ (Docs. 16, 17). But Borghese will not yield, and will be satisfied with nothing less than ‘prontezza’. La Marra’s account is a bit telegraphic, but he appears to signal to Wignacourt that Borghese actually realizes that a habit for Cigoli is not a typical request, and for this very reason appreciates all the more the Grand Master’s cooperation.

The winds of Fortuna can change abruptly. Seven days later, on 8 June (Doc. 22), La Marra reports that on the very day – 1 June – that Wignacourt’s dispatch and grazia were presented to Borghese, Cigoli was hit by a high fever that has lasted all week. The doctors have all but given up on him, and the illness may easily supply the ‘cure’ to the problem of Cigoli’s habit. The physician-art critic Giulio Mancini reports that Cigoli became ill after the scandal of the cupola

217

at Santa Maria Maggiore. Without first seeking a doctor’s advice, the painter took some castor plant seeds (the deadly ricinus communis) which immediately worsened his condition, causing him to die in just a few days.40

It is not known if Cigoli was well enough to understand that his papers from Malta had finally arrived. Although Mancini was at Cigoli’s bedside during the latter’s final hours,41 he does not seem to have first-hand knowledge of the date the documents made it to Rome. The Sienese physician simply notes that ‘people say that the Maltese Cross came to him [Cigoli] the day he died’.

By 13 July 1613, Wignacourt has learned of Cigoli’s death.42 The painter had succumbed on 8 June, obviously just hours after La Marra had sent his message earlier that same day.43 The Grand Master writes to La Marra (Doc. 24) to say that he is thrilled (‘ci siamo rallegrati’) that there had not been time to give the painter the habit. He exhorts La Marra to use his tact in convincing the Cardinal that he should appreciate the Order’s generosity as if the grazia had had its full effect.

But Wignacourt could not have been more wrong about the insatiable Scipione. La Marra informs the Grand Master on 9 November 1613 that Borghese, in a gesture of extraordinary cheek, now wants an honorary habit for the nephew of Cardinal d’Ascoli, since he feels that he is owed a favour; for, after all, Cigoli’s investiture did not go through: ‘perchè oltre all’havermi replicato, l’estesso dell’altra volta, che per l’habito che non hebbe effetto nel Cigoli, stima d’esser in possesso di ricevere questo favore, et che dell’habito di gratia, che richiede ve ne siano molti esempij’.44

According to Baldinucci, Cigoli was dressed in the habit of the Order before he was buried at San Giovanni dei Fiorentini.45 Yet, given that both Wignacourt and Borghese considered that Cigoli’s grazia ‘non hebbe effetto’, it is now apparent that Cigoli never truly became a Knight of Malta.46

218

APPENDIX

Doc. 17 July 1612 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1258 (Lettere degli Ambasciatori presso la Santa Sede, 1611-1612), ff. 54r.–55r. The date is clear on the outside of the letter (f. 55v.). Severely ink-damaged:

Card.le Borghese . . . haveva trattato . . . supplicare . . . favorire la Religione . . . un Breve facoltativo, che . . . Habito di Devotione ad un gentilluomo dallo stato del Gran Duca, che a s.s. Ill.ma e . . . dal Capitolo Generale, . . . la prohibitione dagli statuti, e dalle ordinationi Capitolari . . . mille altri . . . Che al presente m’occorre di V.S. Ill.ma . . . far gratia à me di rispondere una lettera mostrabile, affinche io possa effetiva, et efficacemente mostrar d’haver’ obbedito [ . . . ].

Doc. 211 August 1612 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1258, ff. 122r.–v. Ink-damaged:Card. Borghese . . . habito di Divotione per . . . che per l’ardito desiderio

che esso S.r Card.le hà . . . per questo favore, hiermattina nella Audienza già mi domandò se io haveva anche tenuta da V.S. Ill.ma risposta. Et dicendo io, che per la lunghezza del viaggio nemeno poteva forse sino ad hoggi sia arrivata in Malta detta lettera, s.s. Ill.ma mi repplicò, che bramava di ricever dalla mano di V.S. Ill.ma in tutti i modi detta gratia, et che però io instantiss.o a nome suo la risupplicare à degnarsi benignamente di fargliela, che mi dava parola che mai più costatarla per simili Habiti, perche niuno gli premava mai come questo. Dimaniera Ill.mo Sig.re, che anchorche io di nuovo repplicassi tutto che con la sud.a mia de’ 7 di Luglio [Doc. 1] V.S. Ill.ma havrà inteso [ . . . ].

Doc. 38 September 1612 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1391 (Lettere Wignacourt, 1612), f. 411r.Vedendo che con la vostra delli xi del passato [ Doc. 2 ] ci replicate l’istesso

che ci scrivete con altra delli 7 di luglio [Doc. 1] intorno al molto desiderio che tiene l’Ill.mo Sig.re Card.le Borghesi che noi facciamo gratia di un habito di Devotione à una persona che gli è così grata, onde possiamo giudicare che questo negotio le prema assai come ci significate, et vivendo in noi obligo, et desiderio continuo di obbedire con ogni prontezza à S.S. Ill.ma, vi ordiniamo che se all’arrivo di questa ella perserverà nella detta pretensione, le facciate sapere che noi non habbiamo facultà di concedere simili habiti et che però sarà necessario che ci si dia con Breve di Nro. S.re nel quale sia espresso il nome cognome, et Patria di quello che doverrà ricevere la detta gratia il quale per la qualità di essa conviene, che sia ben’ nato di honorata famiglia, et di buona vita, et costumi, poi che nell’apparenza esteriore sarà sempre stimato, et reputato come li Cav.ri Militi [. . . ].

219

Doc. 422 September 1612 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1258, ff. 227r.–v. Ink-damaged:Desidera il sig.r Card.le Borghese tanto ardentamente la gratia già

due altre volte . . . di quel Habito di Devotione che instantissima et quasi impatientissmam.te mi domandò hiermattina . . . che mi vide all’Audienza se ancora era venuta disposta a proposito. Et sebene . . . gli tornai à rappresentare non solo delle difficoltà . . . mi suggerisce con tuttociò non solamente non è . . . pigliarlo . . . questa gratia . . . mi ha detto, che per non differirla più lungo tempo di qualche . . . andrà pensando di far frattanto spedire il Breve facoltativo per V.S. Ill.ma acciochè subito che ella lo tenga possa fargli questa desideratissima gratia [. . . ].

Doc. 513 October 1612 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1258, f. 275r.[. . . ] anche nella med.ma Audienza d’hiermattina al S.r Card.le Borghese

sull’altra lettera di V.S. Ill.ma toccante alla gratia dell’Habito di Devotione. Di che sentì s.s. Ill.ma infinito contento, et dissemi, che ne sentirebbe molto contento il Papa medesimo. Et che però farebbe hora s.s. Ill.ma spedir il Breve, et l’invierebbe a V.S. Ill.ma acciochè ella si compiacesse dar perfettione à questa gratia, della quale mostra esso S. Card.le rimanerle molto obbligato [ . . . ].

Doc. 627 October 1612 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1258, f. 300r.Con questa havrà V.S. Ill.ma la lettera del S.r Card.l Borghese, et il Breve

di N.S.re per poter conceder l’Habito di Devotione alla persona, che in essi Breve, et lettera presuppongo V.S. Ill.ma intenderà, giachè a me non hà S.S. Ill.ma ultimamente detto altro, senon che la persona è dignissima, et che non pur s.s. Ill.ma ma S.Sta medesima sentirà molto gusto, che V.S. Ill.ma habbia fatta questa gratia [ . . . ].

Doc. 6a12 October 1612 – Cardinal Scipione Borghese to Wignacourt

(untraced; sent with Doc. 6; see Docs. 6, 8, and 10)

Doc. 6bprobably dated between 13 and 26 October 1612 – Brief from Pope Paul V

(untraced; sent with Doc. 6; see Doc. 6)

220

Doc. 731 October 1612 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1391, f. 464v.Poiche l’Ill.mo Sig.re Card.le Borghese la mattina delli 21 del passato [21

September] vi replicò di nuovo il desiderio, che tiene di un habito di Devotione per la persona tanto cara a S.S.ria Ill.ma quanto nuovamente ci viene referto con la vostra delli 22 detto [Doc. 4] , et che con la nostra delli 8 dell’istesso [Doc. 3] l’haverete fatto conoscere che per obedirlo non aspettiamo altro, che la facultà la quale veramente non habbiamo come forse sele presuppone tenghiamo per certo, che ella haverà subito fatto ordinare, che ci vedrà con Breve di Nsr. Sig.r alla ricevuta del quale eseguiremo il commandamento di S.S.ria Ill.ma non dubitando punto che la persona che deve ricevere così gran gratia non habbi la qualità che vi si accetterno con la sudetta nostra per esserne degna [ . . . ].

Doc. 89 December 1612 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1391, f. 534v.Con la ultima spedizione habbiamo ricevuto il Breve facultativo per dare

a Ludovico Civoli fiorentino l’habito di Devotione tanto desiderato dall’Ill.mo Sig.r Cardinale Borghesi; il quale oltre a quello che più volte et con queste ultime vostre ne havete scritto cosi caldamente voi cene fa efficacissima instanza con sua lettera delli 12 d’ottobre in piedi della quale cene prega strettamente con quattro versi di sua propria mano, et per obbedire a S.S. Ill.ma con la prontezza che siamo obligati, habbiamo dato subito al Vicecancelliere Bosio il Breve insieme con le dette lettere, et ordinatoli che ne facci la speditione quanto prima la quale vi si manderà appresso, et allora faremo risposta alla lettera di S.S. Ill.ma [ . . . ].

Doc. 99 December 1612 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1391, ff. 535r.–v.Subito che ricevemmo la lettera dell’Ill.mo sig.r Cardinale Borghesi

con il Breve facultativo per l’habito di Devotione che S.S. Ill.a desidera così caldamente per Lodovico Civoli consegnammo l’uno, et l’altra al Vicecan.lliere Bosio perche ne facesse la conveniente spedizione per mandarla a S.S. Ill.ma con ogni prestezza, il quale ritorno poco di poi in camera nostra, et ci disse che trova in detto Breve una clausoula con la quale seli restringe di sorte la gratia, che non solamente si fà a esso pregiuditio grande, ma ancora a tutti li altri che hanno ottenuto, e per l’avenire otteranno gratia di simile habito come vedrete per le parole lineate nella copia di detto Breve, che vi si manda con questa, poi che non vuole che in modo alcuno che egli goda delli privilegij indulti et esentioni ne anco del foro secolare conforme alla constitutione di Papa Clemente Ottavo di felice memoria spedita sopra cio’ della quale vi ordiniamo che ci mandiate una copia, o’ un transunto. Et poi che conosciamo che S.S. Ill.ma con tanto affetto desidera questa gratia, deviamo anco credere che le sarà caro che sia se non più privileggiate delle altre almeno simile a esso, cio’è senza la detta ristrettiva [f. 535v.] et che il detto Lodovico goda li privlegi, et esentioni del foro, et d’ogni

221

altra cosa come godeno li altri che tengano tale habito, et però sebene habbiamo subito fatta la gratia conforme al tenore del Breve; Ci è parso farne sospendere l’esecutione, et tenerla così fin’che ci aviserete se S.S. Ill.ma comanda che con un altro Breve nel quale sia incluso questo con dichiarare, et levare la detta clausula si rimedi; questo particulare o vero se resta contenta che si spedisca semplicemente conforme al tenore di detto primo Breve, perche in arrivar la vostra risposta si farà spedire subito o’ in un modo o’ nell’altro come piacerà S.S. Ill.ma alla quale scriviamo l’allegata in vostra credenza come vedrete per la sua copia accio le facciate relatione che desideriamo insertare di servirla à questo suo in ogni occasione, et particularmente in questa che ella mostra che tanto le preme [ . . . ].

Doc. 109 December 1612 – Wignacourt to Cardinal Scipione Borghese

AOM 1391, ff. 535v.–536r.Subito ch’io ricevei il Breve facultativo di N.Sre et la benignissima lettera

di V.S. Ill.ma delli 12 d’ottobre con la quale con tanta caldezza mi astringe à [f. 536r.] concedere a Lodovico Civoli l’habito di Devotione, ordinai al Vicecancelliero, che ne facesse quanto prima la speditione et dichiarai la gratia; ma perche in detto Breve si è trovato una clausula insolita, et che restringe la detta gratia di sorte che non faria l’effetto che V.S. Ill.ma desidera in honore, et benefitio del detto Civoli; la supplico con molto affetto à degnarsi d’intendere quello che sopra cio’ le discorrerà l’Ambasciatore La Marra, et a dichiararli il gusto suo che in ricevere la risposta l’obbedirò con tutto l’animo come sono obligato, et con questo fine [ . . . ].

Doc. 112 March 1613 – Brief from Pope Paul V

AOM 458 (Liber Bullarum 1612-15 ), ff. 354v.–355r.Latin Breve allowing Wignacourt to give a grazia on behalf of ‘dilecto filio

Ludovici Cardi Cigoli laici florentinus’. He is to receive the habit of ‘frater militis obedientiae magistralis’ despite the fact that such honours have been prohibited by the ‘Comitatum p.ti Hospitalis’ and that Cigoli owes two thousand scudi (f. 355r.; see text above).

Doc. 128 March 1613 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1392 (Lettere Wignacourt, 1613), f. 103v.Restiamo incredibilmente soddisfatti di quanto ci significate haver discorso

con l’Ill.mo Sig.r Cardinale Borghesi in materia dell’habito di devotione che S.S. Ill.ma mostra tanto desiderare per il pittore Ludovico Civoli, et molto più resteriamo se la destrezza vostra la potesse disporre a contentarsi che segli desse un habito di Cav.re Magistrale per le ragioni, che voi havete rappresentate a S.S. Ill.ma alla quale in qualsivoglia modo soddisfaremo subito che ci venga il Breve facultativo; Ben ci dispiace che non si sia trovato il motu proprio, o’ sia Breve ordinario spedito da Clemente ottavo sopra li Cav.ri di Devotione, poi che il Vicecancelliero Bosio dice essere molto necessario l’haverne un transunto

222

autentico, et che si saria trovato sicuramente, et però potresti domandare à Jacopo suo fratello sene ha qualche notitia, et in effetto fare il possibile per haverlo, et mandarcelo che lo riceveremo per accettissimo servitio. Et perche con le prime speditioni speriamo sicuramente di ricevere il Breve col quale si riuniscono al Magistero la Dignità d’Inghilterra non vi diremo altro con la presente intorno a esso, se non che lo desideriamo in estremo [ . . . ].

Doc. 131 April 1613 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1392, f. 152r.Habbiamo inteso con una delle vostre delli 23 di febraro che l’Ill.mo

Sig.r Card.le Borghese vi haveva detto l’istessa mattina, che finalmente il Civoli si era resoluto a contentarsi di un habito Magistrale ma che però segli dia ancora la licenza di poter testare. Et percio con molta instanza ci pregate a mandar nell’istesso tempo la speditione dell’habito et la sudetta licenza di testare de’ beni patrimoniali. In risposta di che siamo astritti a rispondervi, che ci dispiace incredibilmente per il molto che siamo obligati di servire a S.S. Ill.ma di non poter mandare la detta speditione del sudetto habito Magistrale poi che essendoci come voi ben sapete stata levata dal Capitolo generale l’autorità di dare simili habiti, necessariamente conviene che per questo ci si dia con Breve di N.ro Sig.re senza il quale non si può fare la detta speditione et se pur si facesse saria nulla, potrete percio referire tutto questo a S.S. Ill.ma et assicurarla che quando ci comparira il detto Breve, si farò fare l’una e l’altra speditione; et vi si manderà subito [ . . . ].

Doc. 1413 April 1613 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1259 (Lettere degli Ambasciatori presso la Santa Sede, 1613), f. 13r.

Già haverà V.S. Ill.ma inteso per l’altre mie che le saranno pervenute in appresso quanto ho trattato, e finalmente ho concluso col S.r Card.l Borghese sopra dell’ habito tanto da lui desiderato per il Pittore Lodovico Cevoli, che però non m’occore di soggiognerle altro sopra questo particolare, se non assicurlarla che s.s.ria Ill.ma stà aspettando con l’istesso desiderio quanto presto la speditione dell’habito magistrale insieme con la licenza di testare delli beni patrimoniali che il detto Civoli hà richiesto. E circa il motuproprio spedito da Clm.te 8o sopra li Cavalieri di devotione, confermo a V.S. Ill.ma che in questi Registri di Segretaria non si ritrova, e che io non mi sarei mai messo a scriverglielo sopra oltre haverne pregato Mons.Cobellucci,* che vi fece diligenza particolare per ritrovarlo ad instanza dell’istesso S.re Card.l Borghese non ne havessi domandato anco à Giacomo Bosio, il quale similmente mi disse che non ne haveva alcuna notitia, et il med.mo e ritornato à repplicarmi adesso che gliene hò richiesto; s’assicuri però V.S. Ill.ma ch’io non ascriverei d’affermarle una cosa così a caso [. . . ]. *Scipione Cobellucci, later a Cardinal, was Vatican secretary. He signed the papal Brief of 2 March (Doc. 11).

223

Doc. 1530 April 1613 – Alof de Wignacourt; Magistral Bull making Cigoli a Knight of Magistral Obedience

AOM 458 (Liber Bullarum, 1612-15), ff. 165r.-v.Transcribed and interpolated from several sources in Matteoli 1980, note

71 on pp. 114-15. The Bull was transcribed by Cardi (see our text above) and later published by Rilli-Orsini, Baldinucci, and others. There is no question that this document was considered an enormous honour by Cigoli’s supporters.

Doc. 1630 April 1613 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1392, ff. 205r.–206r.Ambas della Marra Adi 30 di Aprile 1613Con lettera dell’ Ill.mo S.r Card.le Borghese delli 20 del passato inviataci

dal Sig.r Pompilio di Marco habbiamo ricevuto un Breve di N.ro S.re col quale S.S.ta ci dà facultà di far dare l’habito di Cav.re di nostra obbedienza Magistrale à Lodovico Civoli fiorentino non ostante che egli si trovi for’ di Convento, et ancora obligato a pagare 2/M [scudi] per servitio di certi suoi parenti; Et perchè S.S. Ill.ma oltre à quello che ci ha significato con altre sue lettere, et che ci ha fatto scrivere da voi molte volte sopra il desiderio grande che tiene che noi facciamo la detta gratia, celo replica efficaccissimamente con detta ultima sua, et cene prega strettamente con due versi di sua propria mano, per obbedirla con la pronteza che conviene; Ne habbiamo subito fatto fare la speditione in Cancelleria che vi si manda con questa l’esecutione della quale è commessa à voi, o’ à qualsivoglia [f. 205v.] altro nostro Religioso primo requisito, et rispondiamo à S.S. Illma con l’allegata in vostra credenza, come vedrete per la copia che vien con essa acciò con l’occasione di presentargliela la supplichate con molto affetto à nome nostro à degnarsi di farci gratia di haver più mira alla reputatione et decoro di nostra Religione che al gusto di una persona quale il detto Cigoli, et a contentarsi di essere stata obbedita da noi con la concessione di detta gratia, ma di non sene servire in modo alcuno per la repugnanza, che ci interviene per parte del detto Cigoli il quale non solamente non è di quella qualità che da S.S. Ill.ma vi fa detto quando ella vi ordinò che voi ci domandasse detta gratia, ma è persona di basso nascimento et Pittore ordinario et che non solamente vive con la mercede che cava dell’arte sua, ma quel che è peggio è aggravato di grossi debiti et si può credere che come inhabile à poterli pagare si voglia fare scudo del detto habito per non li soddisfare, o’ vero si può dubitare che tutto il giorno habbi à stare per le prigioni in grandissimo vilependio di detto habito, et di nostra Religione et però vi ordiniamo [f. 206r.] espressamente che assicuriate S.S. Illma che già mai è concesso simil gratia à persone aggravate di debito, et come voi sapete sene fà sempre particulare et diligente inquisitione dalli Commissarij che fanno le prove come appare per il nono interrogatorio che è nella esamine delli testimonij, al quale non si è derogato già mai, E però vi incarichiamo che supplichiate S.S. Ill.ma à restar servita di haver più riguardo all’honore di nostra Religione che spera sempre nuove gratie, et accrescimento di honori col mezzo della sua potentissima protettione, che al gusto del detto Cigoli poi che à lei non mancheranno mezzi di honorarlo in altro modo, perche noi confidiamo tanto nella gran prudenza, et benignita di S.S. Ill.ma che tenghiamo per certo, si degnerà farci questa giustissima gratia la quale stimeremo molto più che non vi potramo significare con la presente [ . . . ].

224

Doc. 1730 April 1613 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1392, ff. 206r.–v.Havendovi accennato con l’allegata nostra le ragioni che potrete

rappresentare all’Ill.mo Sig.r Card.le Borghese per disporre S.S. Ill.ma à contentarsi di non si [f. 206v.] servire della speditione che vi si manda per dare l’habito di Cav:re di nostra obbedienza Magistrale à Lodovico Civoli et non essendo sicuri che ella sia per quietarsi con essi senza restar mal soddisfatta di noi; Per la molta stima che facciamo della buona gratia di S.S. Ill.ma la quale desideriamo et vogliamo procurare di conservarci con ogni nostro studio et potere in consideratione delle infinite gratie e favori che habbiamo ricevute et speriamo di ricevere col mezzo della sua potentissima Protettione, Vi ordiniamo che quando finalmente vedrete che ella non si appaghi delle dette ragioni, et che in effetto resti mal sodisfatta, et non si quieti senza l’effetto di detta grazia, diate il detto habbito al sudetto Cigoli quando piacerà à S.S. Ill.ma con assicurarla che non haveriamo già mai concesso simil’ gratia à persona tale [ . . . ].

Doc. 1830 April 1613 – Wignacourt to Cardinal Scipione Borghese

AOM 1392, f. 207r.Havendo ordinato all’Amb. La Marra, che rappresenti à V.S. Ill.ma quanto

gli ho scritto in risposta della benignissima sua delli 20 di Marzo con la quale ricevei il Breve facultativo spedito à favore di Lodovico Cigoli, La supplico con tutto l’animo à degnarsi di darli intiera credenza et ad assicurarsi che nessuno desidera più di me di essere honorato con i suoi comandamenti [ . . . ].

The original letter sent to Rome (AOM 1391 and 1392 being the Convent’s file copies of Wignacourt’s outgoing correspondence) is preserved at the Vatican Library – Barb. Lat. 6688, f. 12r. On a separate page (probably the outside of the envelope of 30 April), bound in with the Vatican letter, the following note appears: ‘Al S. Gio.batta Perug.o / questa è scritta per il neg.o / del povero Cigoli; dice / S.S. Ill.ma che V.S. scriva / al G. M.ro ringratian / dolo affettuosam.te ma / che la grazia è venuta à tempo essendo il Cigoli / morto hoggi à punto’.

Doc. 193 May 1613 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1259, f. 65r.[. . . ] ma come che s.s.ria Ill.ma [Borghese] m’assicurò, che gliene haveva

già inviato in appresso il Breve facultativo, le doverà esser pervenuto dapoi . . . con la licenza di poter testare [ . . . ].

Doc. 2021 May 1613 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1392, ff. 242r.–244r.[f. 243v.] Circa l’habito Magistrale tanto desiderato dell’Illmo sig.r

Cardinale Borghese per Lodovico Civoli vi sarà di poi comparsa la speditione di poterglielo dare, di sorte che speriamo che S.S. Ill.ma ne sarà restato intieramente soddisfatta [ . . . ].

225

Doc. 211 June 1613 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1259, f. 159r.Resi stamattina al s.r Card.le Borghese la lettera che V.S. Ill.ma gli scrisse

in mia credenza [Doc. 18 ] sopra dell’habito magistrale di Lodovico Cigoli, et havendo passato seco l’uno et l’altro a proposito, che la m’impone a fare con le due lettere à parte, che m’hà scritto in questo particolare [Docs. 16, 17], non m’approfittorno niente tutte le ragioni, ch’io gli allegai, acciò si contentasse solamente della prontezza, con la quale era stato servito, con haver riguardo alla reputatione, et decoro della Religione per le qualità della persona di d.o Cigoli, poiche continuò sempre il s.r Card.le à rispondermi, che in ciò conosceva maggiormente la gratia, che gli veniva fatta da v.s. Ill.ma, e che l’accettava per tale, con l’istesso volontà con la quale se’ mosse a richiederla, et hà continuato tanto tempo à desiderarla. Che però secondando io questo suo desiderio, esseguirò la commissione impostami, assicurando a v.s. Ill.ma del molto obbligo, con che Le rimanerà, per haver’io conosciuto, che la grazia gli è stata accettisima siccome con sua lettera particolare penso che le doverà testificare [ . . ].

Doc. 228 June 1613 – La Marra to Wignacourt

AOM 1259, f. 174r.Nell’istesso giorno, ch’io diedi parte al s.r Card.l Borghese della speditione

mandatami da v.s. Ill.ma per l’habito magistrale, che tanto desiderava, sopragionse al Pittore Lodovico Cigoli un accidente di febbre così gagliardo, che essendogli continuato in tutta questa settimana l’ha reso quasi del caso disperato da Medici, onde potrà facilmente il caso porgere il remedio, che non vi hà voluto dare il S. Card.le all’inconvenienza, che porta seco la collatione di questo habito, sicome frà pochi giorni si doverà chiarire del termine del suo male. E frattanto faccio à V.S. Ill.ma humiliss.ma riverenza, pregandolo dal S.re longhissimi, e felicissimi anni di vita.

Doc. 234 July 1613 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1392, f. 342r.Amb. La Marra Adi 4 di luglio 1613Poi che l’Illmo Sig.r Card.le Borghesi non si è voluto quietare con le

ragioni che voi le havete addotte et che tanto desidera l’effetto della gratia dell’habito Magistrale che habbiamo fatto à Lodovico Civoli quanto voi ci scrivete con una delle vostre del primo del passato potrete eseguire la commissione che tenete di darle il detto habito quando piacerà à S.S. Illma caso che non l’habbiate fatto, all’arrivo di questa, et dateci parte dell’operato [ . . . ].

226

Doc. 2413 July 1613 – Wignacourt to La Marra

AOM 1392, f. 349r.[ . . . ] Poi che è piaciuto al Sr. Iddio chiamar à miglior vita Lodovico Civoli

ci siamo rallegrati che non ci sia stato tempo d’effettuare la gratia che gli impetrò da noi l’Ill.mo sig.r Card.le Borghesi dell’habito di Cav.e di nostra obbedienza Magistrale volendo pur credere che S.S. Ill.ma gradirà la detta gratia, come se l’havesse havuto il suo plenario effetto il che desideriamo che proccuriate d’intendere destramente; et ci facciate sapere.

Notes

I am deeply indebted to Miles L. Chappell for his learned guidance on all things Cigoli. I cannot thank him enough for his advice and encouragement. Keith Sciberras, Louise Rice, Linda Pellecchia, and Maroma Camilleri were also helpful, making several important suggestions and clarifying transcriptions. My research on the Knights of Malta has been supported by generous fellowships from the American Academy in Rome; the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton; and the University of Delaware.

1 Castelvecchio di Cigoli is in the area of San Miniato, Pisa. For a thorough study of the documents for Cigoli’s life and works, see above all: A. Matteoli, Lodovico Cardi-Cigoli pittore e architetto (Pisa, 1980).

2 Cigoli’s Roman works are treated in: Matteoli 1980; F. Faranda, Ludovico Cardi detto il Cigoli (Rome, 1986); R. Contini, Il Cigoli (Soncino, 1991); M.L. Chappell, Disegni di Lodovico Cigoli, exhibition catalogue, Galleria degli Uffizi (Florence, 1992); M. Chiarini, S. Padovani, A. Tartuferi (eds.), Lodovico Cigoli, tra Manierismo e Barocco, exhibition catalogue, Palazzo Pitti (Florence, 1992); S.F. Ostrow, Art and Spirituality in Counter-Reformation Rome: The Sistine and Pauline Chapels in S. Maria Maggiore (Cambridge, 1996).

3 The plaque was erected in 1845 by Monsignor Torello Pierazzi, Bishop of San Miniato. No trace remains of Cigoli’s original burial at San Giovanni dei Fiorentini, the church of the Florentine community in Rome. His body was later transported to Florence and buried in the church of SS. Michele Arcangelo e Gaetano da Thiene (not in S. Felicita, as Cigoli had requested in his will). A. Matteoli, ‘La sepoltura del Cigoli’, Commentari, 22, fasc. IV (Oct.-Dec.,1971), pp. 343-7. Matteoli also discusses the Cigoli family coat of arms.

4 See M. Gregori (ed.), Il Seicento Fiorentino: Arte a Firenze da Ferdinando I a Cosimo III, §exhibition catalogue (Florence, 1986), cat. no. 1.21 (Pittura, pp. 113-14; entry by M. Chappell).

5 Inv. M. 990. 66 x 54 cm; L. Corti (ed.), Lungo il tragitto crociato della vita, exhibition catalogue (Venice, 2000), cat. no. 32, pp. 156-7 (entry by L. Innocenti), with prev. bibl. The picture was shown in the 1970 Council of Europe exhibition as an autograph work by Cigoli: The Order of St. John in Malta, with an exhibition of paintings by Mattia Preti, Painter and Knight, exhibition catalogue (Malta, 1970), cat. no. 201, p. 248. A precise dating for the picture has not been established.

6 See E. Acanfora, ‘Sigismondo Coccapani, un artista equivocato’, Antichità viva, 29, nos. 2-3 (1990), pp. 11-25, and fig. 5. See also Venice 2000, p. 157 (entry by L. Innocenti).

7 Inv. 1890, n. 5531. Venice 2000, pp. 173-4, cat. no. 41 (entry by L. Innocenti). 8 An obscure pupil of Francesco Furini, Peruzzi – apparently one of the poorer (in all senses)

members of the Accademia – gave the picture to his institution in 1657 in lieu of a portion of his dues, which he had somehow evaded paying since he had first joined in 1634. Venice 2000, p. 173.

9 L. Cigoli, Prospettiva pratica . . ., ms., Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, Uffizi, no. 2660 A. The frontispiece was probably written by his nephew Cardi in c. 1628. See M.L. Chappell, ‘Cigoli’s Prospettiva pratica: Unpublished but not Unknown’, in L. Massey (ed.), The Treatise on Perspective: Published and Unpublished, in Studies in the History of Art, 59, Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts, Symposium Papers, XXXVI (2003), pp. 105-25.

10 Citations are from the second printed edition (Matteoli 1980, pp. 17-37). An earlier but extremely brief vita was written (before 1621) by the Sienese physician of Urban VIII, Giulio Mancini. For this work, which was similarly not published until the 20th century, see below.

11 For the biographies written by Jacopo Rilli-Orsini (1700) and Filippo Baldinucci (1702), see Matteoli 1980. The brief biography by Giovanni Baglione (Rome, 1642), incidentally, does not mention Cigoli’s knighthood.

12 The frescoes are now detached and in the Museo di Palazzo Braschi. See Faranda 1986, pp. 99-102, with colour illustrations.

227

13 Matteoli 1980, pp. 34-36. Matteoli (note 28 on p. 111) points out that Cigoli was actually 53 years old when he died.

14 In Wignacourt’s Bull of 30 April 1613 (Doc. 15), La Marra is called: ‘Commendarum nostrarum de Rieti et Fermo ed de Buccino, Prioratuum Urbis et Capuae, Commendatario, ac pro nostro Ordine in Romana Curia’. La Marra was sent to Rome to begin his position as Ambassador on 3 March 1611; see AOM 1390 (Lettere Wignacourt: 1611), ff. 76v.-77r.

15 This ban is recorded in the proceedings of the Chapter General. AOM 295 (Sacrum Capitulum Generale, Wignacourt 1612 decimumquintum Melita), f. 60r.: [margin: Rivocatione della gratia d’habiti di Devotione et d’obedienza.] ‘item 15: item R.di dni sexdecim ad instar praecedentis sacri generalis capli cum scrutt ball revocaverunt et rivocant omnis gratias, et concessionis deferendi habitum ordinis nostri sub pretextu divotionis saecularibus personis cuiuscunque qualitatis et conditionis existenentibus fossan factuas à presenti generali capitolo nel faciendas in Concilijs Completis Ritentionum atq’ etiam revocaverunt, et revocant quamcunque gram’, et facultatim suscipiendi habitum obedientiae per presente Capitulum contra forma statuorum forsan concessam, nel [?] à Concilijs Completis Ritenionum concedendam’.

16 See K. Sciberras, ‘Virtuosity honoured, Chivalry disgraced’, in K. Sciberras and D.M. Stone, Caravaggio: Art, Knighthood, and Malta (Malta, 2006), p. 30, with further references.

17 On the ‘second person’, see now K. Sciberras, ‘“Due persone à lui ben viste”: the identity of Caravaggio’s companion as a Knight of Magistral Obedience’, The Burlington Magazine, 147 (January, 2005), pp. 38-39.

18 The ease with which Caravaggio’s waivers came through from the pope leads me to wonder if the Borghese family had not been consulted early on concerning Caravaggio’s visit to Malta.

19 Many of Caravita’s annotations concern Ordinances dating back to the Chapter General of 1631. G.M. Caravita, Compendio alfabetico de’ Statuti della Sacra Religione Gerosolimitana, per facilità alla ricognitione de medesimi (Borgo Nuovo, 1718).

20 The Passaggio is the obligatory donation Knights give the Order upon being received or given a promotion.

21 Caravita 1718, p. 81.22 The ‘Cavaliere Magistrale’, we assume, is identical with a Cavaliere di Obbedienza Magistrale.

Indeed, this is the way Wignacourt himself talks about them. For example, in a letter of 11 February 1613 (AOM 1392, f. 74v.), he wrote to Commendatore Avogadro: ‘dal Capitolo Generale è stato del tutto levato l’autorità di concedere habiti di Devotione, et di Cav.ri di Maestro’.

23 Since during Wignacourt’s magistry the ‘abito di Divotione’ and the ‘abito di Obbedienza’ were both prohibited, I speculate that the Passaggi associated with them were quite high. But they may not have been fixed or published, since these titles were banned. Fees are typically not addressed in the correspondence with heads of state dealing with nominations for pages, ‘abiti fuori convento’, and the like. But the archival evidence often shows, several months later, that hefty sums were paid by the applicants named in the earlier documents. Once their proofs of nobility had been submitted and approved, they were charged. Frequently, warnings are attached to these notices, stating that the appointment or habit in question will be null and void and the anzianità (seniority) accrued forfeited, if the Passaggio is not paid within a certain period of time.

24 See, for example, Doc. 21.25 I am using my intuition here. It is perfectly possible that there were letters originally sent

directly from Borghese to Wignacourt that the Grand Master never received (as Cigoli’s message asserts). But the extant documentation, other than Cigoli’s letter, makes no reference to such wayward missives. Incidentally, the mail service between Rome and Valletta is being unfairly maligned here. Mail frequently made it from one court to the other in about three weeks. In truth, it sometimes took over a month, but this was not the norm. Cigoli’s idea that it took nearly three months for a round-trip was a bit of an exaggeration, especially since Wignacourt often responded to a dispatch the day it arrived.

26 A. Matteoli (ed.), ‘Macchie di sole e pittura: Carteggio L. Cigoli – G. Galilei, 1609-1613’, Bollettino della Accademia degli Euteleti della Città di San Miniato, XXXII (1959), pp. 9-92 (citation from pp. 78-79).

27 See Doc. 13 (1 April 1613), which mentions La Marra’s letter of ‘23 di febraro’.28 Knights are normally expected to leave all their goods to the Order. They may, however, on

their deathbed, set aside one-fifth to designated heirs, if they so wish. This custom is called the ‘quinto’ (or ‘quint’ in English). A special form would need to be filled out and filed in the Cancelleria for it to be legal. But as G. Bruno, Compendio del Codice Gerosolimitano (Malta, 1783), p. 128, explains, the heirs would have to bear the cost of the defunct knight’s funeral out of the quinto: ‘Del quinto dei beni mobili possono disporre li Fratelli in punto di morte con licenza del Gran Maestro; purchè al tempo della disposizione non sian debitori di somma, che ecceda scudi cento moneta di Malta. Dal quinto si deducono le spese dei funerali . . .’.

29 On Cigoli and Galileo, as well as the criticisms of the Pauline Chapel cupola, see especially: E. Panofsky, Galileo as a Critic of the Arts (The Hague, 1954); idem, ‘Galileo as a Critic of the Arts: Aesthetic Attitude and Scientific Thought’ (rev. ed.), Isis, XLVII, no. 1 (1956), pp. 3-15; M.L. Chappell, ‘Cigoli, Galileo and Invidia’, Art Bulletin, LVII, no. 1 (1975), pp. 91-98; S. Ostrow, ‘Cigoli’s Immacolata and Galileo’s Moon: Astronomy and the Virgin in Early Seicento Rome,

228

Art Bulletin, LXXVIII, no. 2 (1996), pp. 218-35; and E. Reeves, Painting the Heavens: Art and Science in the Age of Galileo (Princeton, 1997).

30 See Chappell 1975, p. 95.31 For an excellent overview of this papal practice, see S. Schütze, ‘Arte Liberalissima e Nobilissima.

Die Künstlernobilitierung im päpstlichen Rom – Ein Beitrag zur Sozialgeschichte des Künstlers in der frühen Neuzeit’, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 55, no. 3 (1992), pp. 319-52. For a more general study of the relations between court artists and their patrons, see M. Warnke, The Court Artist: On the Ancestry of the Modern Artist (Cambridge, 1993).

32 D.M. Stone, ‘In Praise of Caravaggio’s Sleeping Cupid: New Documents for Francesco dell’Antella in Malta and Florence’, Melita Historica, XII, no. 2 (1997), pp. 165-77. In this article, I also discuss two intriguing letters, both of 14 March 1606, sent by Wignacourt to his Receivers in Florence and Naples, respectively. The letters concern the safe transport to Malta of an unnamed painter from Florence, who is to come – via Naples and Messina – to the Convent in order to paint in the Grand Master’s Palace (presumably to execute frescoes, though this is not explicitly stated). The Florentine apparently never made the journey. Leonello Spada, who completed a large-scale mural project in the palace in 1610, was probably his replacement. See K. Sciberras and D.M. Stone, ‘Saints and Heroes: Frescos by Filippo Paladini and Leonello Spada’, in A. Ganado (ed.), The Palace of the Grand Masters in Valletta (Malta 2001), pp. 139-57. Miles Chappell (oral communication) suggests the following names as likely Florentine candidates for a fresco project in 1606: Domenico Passignano, Fabrizio Boschi, Cristofano Allori, and Bernardino Poccetti. Cigoli, who before going to Rome was not a major frescoist, was busy finishing his famous altarpiece for St Peter’s (The Miracle of the Cripple) in 1606, and, thus, was probably not recommended for the Malta project.

33 See L. Sebregondi Fiorentini, ‘Francesco Buonarroti. Cavaliere Gerosolimitano e Architetto Dilettante’, Rivista d’arte, Anno XXXVIII, Serie Quarta, Vol. II (1986), pp. 49-86, esp. pp. 61-62.

34 This news was reported the same day, 23 February, in an untraced letter by La Marra mentioned in Wignacourt’s response of 1 April (Doc. 13).

35 It could not have been sent in early March, since it arrived at the Convent together with a letter from the Cardinal dated 20 March (see Doc. 16).

36 See Doc. 11, f. 355r.37 For Cigoli’s will and his concern for his nephews, see Matteoli 1980, p. 449.38 This is the first time Wignacourt spells Cigoli’s name in the conventional form.39 Wignacourt sends two more letters on April 30, one to La Marra (Doc. 17), instructing him

to invest Cigoli as a knight only if he cannot convince Borghese to back down, and another, written directly to the Cardinal (Doc. 18), advising him to listen carefully to what La Marra has to say with regard to Cigoli’s habit. On 3 May, not knowing that the Magistral Bull is already on its way to Rome, La Marra writes to Wignacourt (Doc. 19) to impress upon him Borghese’s impatience. On 21 May 1613 (Doc. 20), an obviously less angry Wignacourt writes to La Marra to say that by now the Magistral Bull for Cigoli should have arrived in Rome.

40 G. Mancini, Considerazioni sulla pittura, 2 vols, A. Marucchi and L. Salerno (eds.), (Rome, 1956), I, p. 229: ‘Nacque Ludovico Cardi, detto Cigoli, come è la commun opinione, in Fiorenza d’honorati cittadini, quali, per haver possessione nella villa di Cigoli, han pensato alcuni che fusse di questa villa, e che da fanciullo poi fusse allevato in Fiorenza. Dico d’honorati et honesti cittadini poichè, nell’ultimo di sua vita, stava aspettando l’habito di cavalier di Malta, o forse per il natale, o vero che, essendo d’honorati cittadini e per valor della professione, gli fusse concesso dalla lingua d’Italia tal habito, come fu concesso a Michelangelo da Caravaggio. [ ... ] Operò doppo alcune cose al giardin dell’illustrissimo Borghese a Monte Cavallo, dove anco si portò bene; e doppo in S. Maria Maggiore la cupola della cappella, dove non havendo havuto nè dato sodisfattione, per quanto vien detto, s’amalò e, per curiosità o troppo sapere, pigliò senz’ordine del medico non so che seme ricino e, malignandosi la febre, in untratto infiacchendosi la vita, morì in pochissimi giorni. Fu di buonissimi costumi, di nobil procedere e di molt’eruditione. Fu detto che, in quello che morì, gli venne la Croce di Malta’. Mancini says the habit was conferred by the Lingua d’Italia, but that, of course, is a mistake, since Cigoli’s grazia was for a Habit of Magistral Obedience, which is uniquely dispensed by the Grand Master. Honorary habits are not received in a Langue. Indeed, Cigoli’s name does not appear in the ruoli of the Italian Langue.

41 According to Cardi; see Matteoli 1980, p. 35.42 The source of Wignacourt’s information is not known. Perhaps a letter from La Marra of

around 9 June is missing.43 On 4 July, not knowing what has happened in Rome, and responding to La Marra’s now

obsolete letter of 1 June (Doc. 21), Wignacourt writes to his Ambassador (Doc. 23), giving him permission to go forward with the arming of Cigoli as a Knight if the ceremony has not already been held.

44 AOM 1259 (1613), ff. 307r.-v.45 ‘Sequito dunque il caso di sua morte in Roma, fattasene subito spedire, con ispesa di quaranta Fiorini

d’oro, la necessaria patente, fu vestito il suo cadevero del sacro abito di Cavalier Milite della Religione Gerosolimitana e con quello accompagnato alla sepoltura, datagli poi – con nobile ma funesto apparato, per modo di deposito – in essa Chiesa di S. Giovanni de’ Fiorentini, a man sinistra, sotto la pila

229

dell’acqua santa’. Baldinucci, as quoted in Matteoli 1980, p. 85.46 Just as buying rings, ordering an organist, hiring a priest, and obtaining a marriage licence

do not entitle a couple to call themselves ‘married’ unless they go through the ceremony and take their vows, similarly, obtaining a grazia from Wignacourt does not make one a Knight. The investiture ceremony was a solemn occasion in which the celebrant took vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Cigoli’s nephew promoted the artist’s status as a Knight, and the later biographers followed suit. But it would be more correct to say that Cigoli had secured the necessary papers to be made a Knight but died before taking the Cross. This is basically what Wignacourt means (Doc. 24) when he writes that ‘non ci sia stato tempo d’effettuare la gratia’. He clearly makes a distinction between his Bull on the one hand and its actual deployment on the other. It was, in my opinion, a compensatory action that Cardi (and others) included the full text of the Magistral Bull in their vite.

230