Michelangelo at Work: Bernardino Basso, Friend, Scoundrel, and Capomaestro

Michelangelo at Work: Bernardino Basso, Friend, Scoundrel and CapomaestroAuthor(s): William E. WallaceSource: I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance, Vol. 3 (1989), pp. 235-277Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Villa I Tatti, The Harvard Center forItalian Renaissance StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4603666 .

Accessed: 18/05/2014 14:23

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press and Villa I Tatti, The Harvard Center for Italian Renaissance Studies arecollaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.252.67.66 on Sun, 18 May 2014 14:24:03 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hcirs

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hcirs

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4603666?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


MICHELANGELO AT WORK

Bernardino Basso, friend, scoundrel and capomaestro

WILLIAM E. WALLACE

M f ichelangelo rightly claimed that he "never ran a workshop like the others", by which he meant a conventional bottega in the manner of his teacher, Domenico Ghirlandaio,

or other successful Florentine artists such as Andrea del Verrocchio and the Pollaiuolo brothers.! Nonetheless, he employed and supervised numerous assistants, especially on large-scale architectural and sculptural projects as, for instance, the New Sacristy, the Lau- rentian Library, the tomb of Julius II, and the new church of St. Peter's. While simultaneously directing work on the New Sacristy and Laurentian Library in mid-1525, for example, Miche- langelo had more than one hundred stone and marble carvers on tlae weekly payroll at San Lorenzo. For the most part, these were not young garzoni apprenticed to learn a craft, but skilled artisans hired to carry out specific tasks, sometimes without the master's direct supervision.

I gratefully acknowledge the generous financial assistance I have received from the National Endowment for the Humanities and from Washington Uni- versity which permitted me to carry out the research for this article during a year in Florence, 1986-1987. I would like to thank Elizabeth Cropper and Charles Dempsey for inviting me to present my research in progress at the Charles S. Singleton Center for Italian Studies (The Johns Hopkins University), Villa Spelman, Florence. My thanks are also extended to a number of persons who haved helped me in preparing this article, in particular, Paul Barolsky, Harriet M. Caplow, Gino Corti, Elizabeth Cropper, Caroline Elam, Francis William Kent, Richard Goldthwaite, Samuel Heath, Piero Morselli, and Milette Sbrilli, as well as the staffs of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, the Archivio di Stato, Flor- ence, and the Archivio Salviati, Pisa.

1 II Carteggio di Michelangelo, ed. P. BAROCCHi-R. RISTORI, Florence, 5 vols., 1965-1983, IV, p. 299 (henceforth Carteggio).

235



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

Throughout his career Michelangelo drew upon the skills of experienced craftsmen and colleagues. He had few apprentices but many assistants, and several long-term collaborators. This essay investigates Michelangelo's relationship with one important, albeit virtually unknown assistant, Bernardino Basso.

Bernardino di Piero Basso was a neighbor and family acquaintance of Michelangelo from childhood, a longtime versatile assistant, a sometime friend and occasional nemesis, as well as a director of works (capomaestro) at San Lorenzo in Florence. The lives of the two men were intricately interwoven for more than sixty years, including a working collaboration over a span of at least twenty years. Undoubtedly, Michelangelo first hired Bernardino because of their families' long acquaintance; however, Michelangelo came to rely increasingly on Bernardino as a competent and trusted professional associate.

The long and sometimes colorful relationship between the famous artist and his assistant can be reconstructed from numerous scattered references in Michelangelo's records and correspondence, and from archival information on Bernardino, his family, and his professional relations. Thus we can trace virtually the entire life and career of this modest Renaissance artisan, and follow the grad- ually improved fortunes of his family over the course of three generations thanks in part to their continuous association with the Buonarroti. More importantly, an examination of Bernardino's career permits us to scrutinize Michelangelo at close range, to view some of the everyday concerns, both professional and private, of the great artist. Particularly between 1524 and 1526, when Ber- nardino collaborated closely with Michelangelo on his various commissions at San Lorenzo, we are afforded a glimpse of the internal working and day-to-day activities at a large Renaissance building site. Moreover, Bernardino provides a means of examining the intricate web of professional, family, and neighborhood ties that unite many of the more than two hundred assistants who worked for Michelangelo at San Lorenzo. Such relationships - the matrix of Florentine Renaissance society - were also intrinsic to the group of professional artisans who worked under Michelangelo. Yet, the social, economic, and artistic ramifications of those relationships are seldom discussed and form no part of the vast literature on the San Lorenzo commissions. This essay attempts to rectify this

236




imbalance and to modify the prevalent view that Michelangelo was an isolated genius unwilling or incapable of effective collaboration.

Our knowledge of the relations between Michelangelo and Bernardino begins with their respective families. Bernardino's father, Piero di Bernardo di Sandro, known familiarly as Piero Basso, was a resident of the parish of Sta. Maria in Settignano and was employed by the Buonarroti from at least 1470, five years before Michelangelo was born.2 Piero was a general handyman for Michelangelo's father, Ludovico Buonarroti, and a tenant farmer (lavoratore di tere) of the family property in Settignano. lie appears frequently in the Buonarroti accounts between 1477 and 1505, and, for example, is documented supervising work on the family house in 1505.4

Considering Piero's position and long association with the Buonarroti family, it is not surprising that Michelangelo requested that he come to Rome in early 1508 to help construct the re- volutionary scaffolding in the Sistine Chapel.5 Piero is surely the "pover uomo" and family acquaintance who, according to Mi- chelangelo's biographer, Ascanio Condivi, dismantled Bramante's scaffolding and rebuilt it according to Michelangelo's more eco- nomical design, thereby saving an immense quantity of rope which was sold to provide dowries for the man's two daughters.6 From

2 Archivio di Stato, Florence: Decima della Repubblica (henceforth ASF: Dec. Rep.), 385 (S. Giovanni, 1504), fol. 801r.

I He is mentioned as such in the Buonarroti catasto declaration of 1470, published by K. FREY-H. GRIMM, "Denunzia dei beni della famiglia de' Buo- narruoti", Jahrbuch der kdniglich preussischen Kunstsammlungen, VI, 1885, p. 191.

4 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), I, p. 377, n. 1. I Michelangelo wrote to Francesco Granacci in April asking him to send

Piero to Rome, as we know from Granacci's reply (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], I, pp. 64-65).

6 A. CONDIVI, Life of Michelangelo Buonarroti, trans. G. BULL, Oxford, 1987, p. 65. Condivi refers to the man only as a "pover uomo" with two daughters which accords with the documentary evidence (see following note and Table I). Giorgio Vasari, who evidently learned of the story from Condivi since it is only mentioned in his second edition, inadvertantly altered the facts by mentioning only one daughter and referring to the man as a "povero uomo legnaiuolo" thereby characterizing him as something more than merely a 'poor man'. It is evident, however, that Michelangelo employed Piero because he

237



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

Piero's tax declaration, we know that he was poor and further, that he had two daughters: Ceccha who would have been twenty- two in 1508, and Sandra who was sixteen at the time (Table I).7

Michelangelo's affection for the older man, thirty-four years his senior, is attested to by a boyhood friend, Francesco Granacci, who once referred to him as "vostro Piero Basso".8 When the sixty-seven year old Piero fell ill in the summer of 1508 and returned to Florence, Michelangelo wrote twice to his brother Buo. narroto asking after the man's health.9 Condivi's anecdote of the "pover uomo" - corroborated by literary and documentary evidence - aptly characterizes Michelangelo's relations with the Bassi, a picture which is confirmed in his subsequent ties with Piero's son.

Bernardino (or Bernardo) di Piero Basso, was born in 1474 or 1475, the eldest and only male child of Piero Basso and his wife Mona Antonia (Table I). He was Michelangelo's exact contem- porary and the two obviously knew one another from early youth although their documented relationship only dates from 1514 when both men were approaching forty years of age.

Bernardino joined the guild of stone and woodworkers in

was a skillful and familiar handyman, not because he was a alegnaiuolo" in the sense of a proper guild craftsman (see G. VASARI, La vita di Michelangelo nelle redazioni del 1550 e del 156;8, ed. P. BAROCCHI, 5 vols., Milan-Naples, 1962, I, p. 37, and W. WALLACE, "Michelangelo's Assistants in the Sistine Chapel", Gazette des Beaux-Arts, CX, 1987, pp. 204-205 and n. 16).

7 As deduced from his tax declaration of 1504 (ASF: Dec. Rep. 385, fol. 801r). Piero declared no "sustanza" and was renting a house and small farm (podere) from the brothers of Sta. Maria Novella for 76 lire a year (for which type of arrangement, see the discussion of E. CONTI, La formazione della struttura agraria moderna nel contado fiorentino, I, Rome, 1965, pp. 9-10 and passim). The relations between landowners and their tenant farmers has been discussed by A. MoLHo, "Cosimo de' Medici: 'Pater Patriae' or 'Padrino'? ", Stanford Italian Review, I, 1979, pp. 5-33; F. W. KENT in F. W. KENT et al., Giovanni Rucellai ed il suo Zibaldone II: A Florentine Patrician and his Palace, London, 1981, pp. 74-75, and D. V. and F. W. KENT, "Two Vignettes of Florentine Society in the Fifteenth Century", Rinascimento, XXIIr, 1983, pp. 246-247.

8 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), I, p. 64. Letters of 29 July and 5 August 1508 (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1],

I, pp. 75, 79). Buonarroti's reply concerning Piero Basso is dated 5 August 1508 (ibid., p. 77).

10 Bernardino's age is deduced from his father's tax declaration in which it is stated that his son "Bernardo suo filiolo" was thirty years old in 1504 (ASF: Dec. Rep. 385, fol. 801r).

238



0

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 -'Jo C

0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0' 7 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~.

U) z~~~~~~~U

Cl C 0 C

0~~~~~~ a ~~~~00

C)~ ~ ~~~V 0

0 .J

239~0



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

1507.11 He is recorded as a "scarpellino" in 1514 when Miche- langelo employed him to help with improvements on the Buonar- roti house in Via Ghibellina (Fig. 1). In the long list of expenses incurred for this work, Bernardino is one of only two stonecarvers amidst a number of wallers, woodworkers, tilers, and manual laborers who were paid for a variety of materials and services."2 Bernardino was paid to carve window and door frames and, fore- shadowing a subsequent role at San Lorenzo, he procured stone in Florence to pave the terrace of the house. From this moment on, Bernardino appears frequently in Michelangelo's records and correspondence, and he plays an increasingly important part in the master's commissions, despite occasional friction between the two.

Immediately following his employment on the Via Ghibellina house, Bernardino received a much more important assignment from Michelangelo. In August 1514, Michelangelo sent him to Rome to carve the cornice of the lower story of the tomb of Julius II (Fig. 2).13 Although Antonio da Pontassieve had sub-

11 ASF: Arte dei Maestri di Pietra e di Legname, (henceforth ASF: maestri), Matricole 2, fol. 174r; and Matricole 4, fols. 391v-392r. It is conceivable, although perhaps unlikely, that the newly matriculated artisan accompanied his father to Rome the following year to help Michelangelo with the scaffolding in the Sistine Chapel. On the other hand, this would help explain his prominent role as Michelangelo's assistant shortly after the completion of the ceiling, as well as his matriculation at an advanced age (he was 32 or 33 years old in 1507). One notes, for example, that the papal master of ceremonies, Paris de Grassis, referred to more than one carpenter when he complained of the mess they were making in constructing the scaffolding (C. SEYMOUR ed., Michelangelo: The Sistine Chapel Ceiling, London, 1972, p. 104). From the fee paid to ma- triculate (24 lire), it does not appear that Bernardino's father was a member of the guild. Possibly Bernardino matriculated precisely because he intended to work for Michelangelo rather than be a farmer like his father. It is also possible that Bernardino is the unidentified Bernardo mentioned in three letters from Lodovico Buonarroti to his son Buonarroto in 1511 (II Carteggio indiretto di Michelangelo, I, ed. P. BAROCCHI, K. L. BRAMANTI, R. RISTORI, Florence, 1988, pp. 31-34).

12 I Ricordi di Michelangelo, ed. L. B. CIuLIcH-R. RISTORI, Florence, 1970, pp. 8, 10, 12 (henceforth Ricordi). The other stonecarver, Francesco del Poggio, is disc.ussed below.

13 On 19 August, Michelangelo received a letter from his assistant in Rome, Silvio Falcone, stating that Antonio da Pontassieve was awaiting Bernar- dino's imminent arrival (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], p. 149). Silvio Falco- ne was an assistant who lived in Michelangelo's house in Rome and looked after the master's affairs in his absence; he had acted as witness to Michelangelo's

240



Fig. 1. Casa Buonarroti (Florence).



Fig.2. oNe tr fteTm fJlu I yMceagl

a _

* 4L

Fig 2 . LwrSoyothTmb :..;ofJluI,byMceago lji~~~~S Pitr in Vicoi Rome).

A7- 1s;y../r s;

Fig. 3. Detail, Cornice of Tomb of Julius II, by Bernardino Basso (S. Pietro in Vincoli, Rome).



0 <, l ~~~. - - _Ai

;~ ~ ~ ~ K JS . ~ . ' sI

~~~~~~~~~ V4 -'

..... _ _,, _ __~~~~~1 ''-?1

'gj n | <|t * \ Pz~~~~~~~bW' -

*~~~~~~t .- I



TY__



Fig. 7. Interior of the Laurentian Library Reading Room, by Michelangelo (San Lorenzo, Florence).

..... ... ..

.. ...... ......

Fig. 8. Interior View of the Laurentian Library Vestibule, by Mclnl(a I oIrz F l o r



IN~~~~tt,~'

o>>>~~~

U

I*. o .

* -x~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

\4 44~' 0 ~'

701 Ift~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. I-

r*N A o .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~., Air '



Fig. 10. Detail, Libretto of Stones Delivered for the Laurentiana Library, 11 December 1525-2 August 1526,

in unknown hand (Archivio Buonarroti, Florence, II-III, n. 66, fols. 2v-3r).



Fig. 11. Reliquary Tribune Balcony, designed by Michelangelo (San Lorenzo, Florence).



Fig. 12. Entrance Doorway to Reliquary Tribune Balcony, designed by Michelangelo (Upper Cloister, San Lorenzo, Florence).



~~ ~~~ -)?-at -w j { 2 # eSi vY~~~~~~~J' ,. ,-* \ d

Fig. 13. Design for Reliquary Tribune Balcony, by Michelangelo. Black chalk, 15.5 X 27 cm. (Ashmolean Museum, Oxford).

Fig. 14. Detail of Macigno Pilaster, Reliquary Tribune Balcony, (San Lorenzo, Florence).




contracted to dress and decorate (a squadrare e intagliare) the lower story blocks, the carving of the cornice - a prominent architectural element - was left to Bernardino. The richly articulated cornice (Fig. 3), therefore, can be taken as an indication of Bernar- dino's skill as a carver, and a measure of Michelangelo's confidence in his abilities. Bernardino returned to Florence shortly after, since in October we find him expressing his desire, via Mi- chelangelo's brother and father, to return to Rome to help further with the tomb."4 Michelangelo, who in the meantime had moved to Rome, wrote his father in January 1515: "If he [Bernardi- no] wants to come, let him come now, before I take on others, because I want to get something started [on the tomb of Julius II]. I will give him the wage you mentioned, that is to say, three ducats a month and his expenses ". 5 Michelangelo went on to stipulate his conditions, stating that Bernardino would live in his house and share his frugal existence: "It is true that I live simply in my own house and intend to do so; so tell him this, and not to delay; and if after a week he does not like my way of living, he can return home and I will give him enough money to

)) 16 return . Bernardino did join Michelangelo in Rome but he departed less

than six months later. Michelangelo expressed his angry disap- pointment with him in a letter to his brother, complaining that he could not entrust tasks to anyone "because if they are not fools, they are knaves and rascals, like that scoundrel Bernardino, who cost me a hundred ducats during the time that he was here, be- sides going about tittle-tattling and complaining about me all over Rome, as I discovered on my return here". Michelangelo conclud- ed by warning Buonarroto, "He is a proper scoundrel; shun him

agreement with Antonio da Pontassieve regarding work to be carried out on the tomb (see Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], pp. 5-7).

14 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), I, pp. 151, 154 and pp. 385-387 on the dating of these letters.

15 Ibid., I, p. 154; translated in E. H. RAMSDEN, The Letters of Mi- chelangelo, 2 vols., Stanford, 1963, I, p. 84. The interval between Bernardino's offer to return to Rome and his actual arrival is explained by Michelangelo's desire to complete the arrangements on the house in the Macel de' Corvi where they would live and work.

16 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), I, p. 154; trans. by RAMSDEN, Op. Cit. (see note 15), I, p. 84.

241



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

like the devil, and don't let him enter the house under any pretext whatsoever" ."7 This would scarcely be the last time that Miche- langelo encountered problems with Bernardino.

Complaints against his assistants (and family) inspired some of Michelangelo's most purple prose, but his indignant outbursts, although usually justified, should not prejudice the larger picture. Michelangelo's letters are replete with such oft-quoted complaints: Michele di Piero Pippo was unreliable and deceitful; Sandro di Poggio was a swindler and philanderer as well as deceitful; Ru- becchio was a "contemptible wretch", and Donato Benti's ill-service nearly cost Michelangelo his life. Yet Michelangelo depended on these same assistants and, excepting Rubecchio, they remained in his employ and served him faithfully and competently long after they inspired his momentary rage."8 Similarly, Bernardino repeated- ly caused trouble for Michelangelo, yet their personal differences never ended their professional collaboration. Although there is a gap in their documented relationship following Bernardino's de- parture from Rome in 1515, and their collaboration does not certainly resume until 1523, the interruption may be partly explained by a hiatus in Michelangelo's own career during these same years, a period marked by the abortive commission for the San Lorenzo fagade (1516-1520) and the papacy of Adrian VI (1521-1523).19 The situation changed dramatically with the elec-

17 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), I, p. 170; trans. by RAMSDEN, op. cit. (see note 15), I, p. 93.

18 Michelangelo's complaints zagainst Michele di Piero Pippo are found in Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), I, p. 169 and ibid., II, p. 42; against Sandro di Poggio in ibid., and ibid., II, p. 70. Michele, however, long served Mi- chelangelo and the two obviously remained very close. Sandro was back in the quarries approximately two months after Michelangelo's angry letter and he continued to serve the master until his death in 1520. Michelangelo's anger against Donato Benti, his most faithful and reliable assistant in the quarries, was inspired by a particular incident, a faulty ring that Benti had obtained from his "chompare", a smith who used poor quality materials (ibid., II, p. 185). There is much evidence for the good relations between Miche- langelo and these assistants, who, for the most part, proved to be competent and trustworthy employees. Rubecchio, on the other hand, was released after he almost ruined a column, yet he is more the exception than the rule.

19 It is possible that Bernardino is mentioned in the lengthy instructions that Michelangelo gave to Pietro Urbano in 1517 regarding his house in Rome: "... n[ella cam]era di sopra, dove sta Bernardino" (Ricordi, op. cit. [see note 12], p. 23, and Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], II, pp. 174-175). Paola Ba-

242




tion of Giulio de' Medici as the new pope, Clement VII, in November 1523.

* * *

One week after the election of Pope Clement, Michelangelo candidly expressed his satisfaction in a letter to Topolino, his overseer of quarrying operations in Carrara.' Eager to renew work on the New Sacristy after its interruption during the papacy of Adrian, Michelangelo went to Rome in December to confer with the new pontiff. Michelangelo received assurances of financial support to carry out the New Sacristy and to erect a library at San Lorenzo. He was strongly encouraged to hire whatever assistants he needed and to begin work immediately.

During the following decade, 1524-1534, Michelangelo wvas busily engaged on several commissions simultaneously for the Medici at San Lorenzo including the decoration of their family burial chapel, the design and construction of the Laurentian Li- brary, and the erection of a balcony for the ceremonial display of relics inside the main church. Bernardino Basso was one of the first persons employed by Michelangelo and through the course of the San Lorenzo commissions served the artist in a wide variety of ways and in an increasingly important capacity. Even before leaving for Rome to confer with Pope Clement, Michelangelo sent Bernardino to Carrara to obtain from Topolino "some blocks of marble which he [Bernardino] needs"."2 Bernardino was evidently sent on Michelangelo's behalf and in anticipation of a renewal of work on the New Sacristy. Michelangelo's own eagerness is re- vealed in the urgent tone of the missive in which he heartily com- mended Bernardino to Topolino and requested that the latter direct him to the marble and to persons who would serve him well and quickly, that is, help arrange to have the blocks shipped to Flor-

rocchi and Renzo Ristori identified the Bernardino in this ricordo as Bernar- dino Zacchetti who assisted Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel; however, considering the larger context of Michelangelo's relations with these two assistants it is possible that the reference is to Bernardino Basso.

20 "You will have heard that Medici is made pope, which seems to me will cheer the whole world; while here, I estimate, with regard to art, that many things will be accomplished" (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 1).

21 Ibid., III, p. 1.

243



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

ence. The two assistants became friends and eventually next door neighbors.

In April 1524, Michelangelo began keeping weekly lists of the names of all the stone and marble carvers (scarpellini) employed at San Lorenzo and the number of days that each assistant worked. These lists, in Michelangelo's own hand, cover a period of sixteen months, from April 1524 to August 1525, and document the rapid expansion of his work crew from a core of approximately a dozen individuals in the spring of 1524, to more than 110 persons during the summer of 1525 (e.g. Fig. 4). Bernardino Bass'o first appears on the list of 20 August 1524, although he already was assisting Michelangelo at least since November of the previous year.' Bernardino is listed separately at the bottom of the record sheet and paid for three days work in kind, receiving six barrels (of wine) while the other scarpellini received twenty soldi a day. In subsequent lists, he is occasionally included among the marble sawers (segatori), and frequently after Francesco da Sangallo whose pay and specialty carving separated him from the rest of the scarpellini. The lists and fragmentary notices during this first year and a half suggest that Bernardino performed a variety of tasks - a sort of personal assistant and righthand man who did everything from roughing out marble to running errands and serving as a witness for payments that Michelangelo made to other assistants.' Several times Michelangelo referred to him as Bernar- dino "che lavora mecho" and "che m'aiuta".24

In August 1524, for example, the woodworker Baccio di Puccione helped Bernardino construct a wooden support for a

22 Ricordi, cit. (see note 12), p. 147. We recall that Michelangelo sent him to the marble quarries in November 1523 to obtain certain pieces of marble and he probably remained some time assisting Topolino or supervising the transport of the blocks to Florence (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 1).

23 See, for example, lists of 3, 24 September in which he is listed with the 'segatori" (Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], pp. 148-149), and those of 1, 15, 22 October, 5, 12, 19, 26 November, and 3, 10, 24 December etc. in which he appears grouped with Francesco da Sangallo (ibid., pp. 150-155, 161-163). He acted as a witness to the payment Michelangelo made to Meo delle Chorte "per el renaiuolo per segare e' marmi" on 15 November 1524 (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1]', III, p. 115 and Ricordi, cit. [see note 121, p. 161).

24 Ricordi, cit. (see note 12), pp. 132, 147.

244




figure that the latter was roughing out for Michelangelo.' In several other notices from September and October, we find him purchasing materials such as wire and balls of twine to build the full-size figure models in clay and tow (e.g. Fig. 5), and wood from the Mercato Vecchio and nails to make trestle tables - probably not unlike the modern version seen in Figure 6 - to support the heavy models and the even heavier marble blocks.' Similarly, in November, Michelangelo reimbursed Bernardino for purchasing materials - turpentine, linseed oil, white wax, goat fat, common oil (olio chomune), a ball of twine, and a mixing pot - used to make the oiled paper windows (finestre incartate) for the sacristy and its surmounting lantern.'

Throughout the year August 1524 - 1525, Bernardino regularly appears on Michelangelo's lists of assistants, working an average of more than five days a week.' When work began in earnest

25 Ibid., p. 132. Payment of 13 August 1524: '...fare un telaio da chor misure per una figura che e' mi bozza". Michelangelo and Baccio di Puccione knew one another and occasionally worked together for at least ten years (1518- 1527), and probably longer. Baccio, for example, was a principal witness in 1518 when Michelangelo purchased property in Via Mozza in Florence (ibid., p. 46). Baccio's woodworking shop was located nearby, and he acted as a sort of general construction foreman when Michelangelo built the workshop on Via Mozza (ibid., pp. 46-51, 78, 91). Michelangelo even conducted business 'in boctega di Baccio di Puccione" (ibid., pp. 49-50). In the New Sacristy, Baccio constructed scaffolding, the window frames for the sacristy and for the lantern, made rulers, stools, and workbenches for the scarpellini as well as trestle tables to support the tomb figures. The two men had many professional and personal ties, as is evident from the frequent mention of Baccio in Michelangelo's records and correspondence (ibid., pp. 49, 104, 128-133, and passim).

16 Ibid., pp. 132, 157-158. Payments of 24 September, and 5, 6, 8 October. These tables or benches are described as deschi ("deschi per lavorarvi su certe figure delle sepulture") and centine ("centine per farvi su decti modegli") built of especially heavy timbers, panchoni and piane (Ibid., pp. 130-132). These special tables were needed to support the full-size clay models and then to carve the marble blocks for the Medici tomb allegories and probably the rivergods, the former requiring special curved surfaces (hence "centine") similar to their final destination, the sarcophagi covers in the sacristy.

27 Ricordi, cit. (see note 12), p. 160. Baccio Puccione built the window frames. On the lantern, see W. WALLACE, "The Lantern of Miche- langelo's Medici Chapel", Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institute in Flo- renz (in press).

28 Bernardino is documented working 206 days as recorded on 39 weekly lists between 20 August 1524 and 5 August 1525, with the documents missing for eight of those weeks.

245



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

on the Laurentian Library in early 1525, Bernardino's responsibilities shifted from the sacristy to the library and his wage dropped from twenty to eighteen soldi a day. At San Lorenzo, fluctuations in pay, either up or down, correspond to the type of work accomplished: the scarpellini who carved marble in the New Sacristy earned twenty soldi (one lira) a day, but the highest wage earned by workers at the Laurentian Library - who worked in stone (macigno) - was eighteen soldi. This day rate according to task was a principal means of determining wages at San Lorenzo; therefore, Bernardino's change of pay should not be construed as a 'demotion' but as a change of duties which, in fact, may have entailed greater responsibilities. Instead of serving merely as Mi- chelangelo's handyman around the New Sacristy, Bernardino became one of the principal suppliers of stone for the Laurentian Library and vestibule.

Macigno is a fine-grained arenaceous stone that is found in the hills north of Florence, mainly between Fiesole and Settignano. It is used ubiquitously in Florentine building and decoration, both in- doors and out, for everything from columns to window frames, chimneys to coats of arms. The finest macigno of all, according to Vasari, is a durable stone called "pietra del fossato" which is differentiated from other macigni, including the better known "pietra serena" and "pietra forte ", by the fineness of its grain and the subtlety of its color which ranges from bluish grey to dark green but defies simple description. It is so hard, wrote Vasari, that it takes as long to carve as marble. It can be cut with crisp edges, it takes a fine polish, and it withstands the effects of time. Duke Cosimo de' Medici forbade its use except in public buildings, and Vasari claims to have employed it for the Uffizi and the loggia of the Mercato Nuovo. Michelangelo selected it for the interior wall articulation of the Laurentian Library reading room and vestibule (Figs. 7-8).2

29 G. VASARI, Le vite de' piiu eccellenti pittori, scultori ed architettori, ed. G. MILANESI, 9 vols., 1878-1885, I, pp. 125-126. Comparing "pietra del fossato" to "pietra serena" Vasari wrote: "Ma molto piu durabile di questa e di piu bel colore e una sorte di pietra azzurrigna, che si dimanda oggi la pietra del Fossato". On the varieties of macigno, see F. RoDOLICO, Le pietre delle citta

246




Michelangelo's preoccupation with selecting the highest quality marble and his difficulties in quarrying and transporting it are well known. Yet the artist was nearly as particular about macigno as he was about marble. For example, the contract for the stairs and two doors of the Laurentian Library specified that the stone was to be "pietra del fossato", of the same color and 'flavor' (colore et sapore) as that of the sample (saggio) brought from the quarries to show Michelangelo.' Macigno was available locally and, compared to marble, was much cheaper to quarry and transport; however, because of the quantity of stone required for the library and Michelangelo's insistence on its uniform quality and coloration, the procurement of macigno was a similarly important component of this commission. Michelangelo could not merely purchase the stone from various supplies in Florence, but had to make his own arrangements to have stone quarried and delivered to San Lorenzo as Filippo Strozzi did when he desired fine quality stone for the interior of Palazzo Strozzi.3'

As Michael Baxandall has observed, the artist's control over the sources of his materials was a mark of his independence from traditional contractual obligations.2 On the other hand, such free- dom placed additional burdens on the artist. Michelangelo was free to select the stone he wanted and to make arrangements for quarrying and carving it, yet the size of the library, and the

d'Italia, Florence, 1953, pp. 235-249; idem, "Lessico Petrografico Vasariano", II Vasari: storiografo e artista (Atti del congresso internazionale nel IV cente- nario della morte), Florence, 1974, pp. 65-74; see also E. REPETTI, Dizionario geografico, fisico, storico della Toscana, II, Florence, 1836, p. 107; L. ELDMANN, "Sulla 'pietra del Fossato"', Bollettino della societ2 geologica italiana, LXIX, 1950, pp. 89-94, who notes the differences between the stone used by Michelangelo at San Lorenzo and that used by Vasari in his buildings; idem, "Sulle arenarie del Monte Ceceri presso Fiesole", Facolta' agraria e forestale. Annali di Firenze, ser. 3, I, 1937, pp. 153-164; G. BARONI, La parrocchia di S. Martino a Majano: cenni storici, Florence, 1875, pp. 86-88, and G. VASARI, Vasari on Technique, trans. L. S. MACLEHOUSE, [1907], rpt. New York, 1960, pp. 57-59.

30 Le Lettere di Michelangelo Buonarroti coi ricordi ed i contratti artistici, ed. G. MILANESI, Florence, 1875, p. 707.

31 R. GOLDTHWAITE, "The Building of the Strozzi Palace: The Construction Industry in Renaissance Florence", Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, X, 1973, p. 118, and idem, The Building of Renaissance Florence: An Economic and Social History, Baltimore and London, 1980, pp. 230-231.

3 M. BAXANDALL, The Limewood Sculptors of Renaissance Germany, New Haven and London, 1980, pp. 103-104 with further references.

247



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

amount of labor and materials required to carry it out added enormously to the logistical and administrative complexity of the project.3 In assisting Michelangelo with these aspects of the library commission, Bernardino Basso played an unglamorous yet invaluable role.

Shortly after Pope Clemetit and Michelangelo reached an agreement on the location and design of the Laurentian Library in 1524, Michelangelo visited a certain Gherardo di Michele of Set- tignano in his shop on the via Tornabuoni in Florence in order to discuss arrangements to quarry stone for the building. Since Gherardo owned stone quarries (cave) and consequently did not have to pay rent on them, he was willing to sell good quality stone without defects (di buona roba e bela, di masi ge[n]ttili, netti d'ogni difetto), in whatever quantity Michelangelo needed for twenty soldi a carrata, a price that he would not offer to anyone else.34 No other record of these negotiations survives but related evidence permits us to reconstruct the outcome and the larger context of Gherardo's offer.

Gherardo di Michele di Gherardo belonged to an old and well- established family of scarpellini from Settignano (Table I).3 He

3 As Richard Goldthwaite has noted, a central problem of the construction industry was the organization of supply and labor (GOLDTHWAITE, op. cit. [see note 31], p. 117). Materials and labor were much less problematical for most cathedral workshops. The Opera of the Florentine cathedral owned extensive tracts of forest, had well established marble quarrying operations at Carrara since the mid-14th century, and was the principal supplier of wood and marble for the city (ibid., p. 229; see also C. KLAPISCH-ZUBER, Les mattres du marbre: Carrare 1300-1600, Paris, 1969, pp. 81-105 and passim, and F. L. MUSTARI, "The Sculptor in the Fourteenth Century Florentine Opera del Duomo", Ph. D. dissertation, University of Iowa, 1975, pp. 143-159). At Troyes, for example, the chapter owned several stone quarries and transport was arranged by contract with local carters, an operation that ran, as it were, independently of the building's several master builders (S. MURRAY, Building Troyes Cathedral: The Late Gothic Campaigns, Bloomington-Indianapolis, 1987, p. 8).

I 3 Towards the end of September 1524, Michelangelo received a letter from Gherardo di Michele da Settignano who noted that it had been a few days since Michelangelo passed by his shop (Carteggio, op. cit. [see note 1], III, p. 107).

35 Gherardo matriculated in the guild of stone and woodworkers on 23 August 1511 (ASF: maestri 4, fols. 434v-435r [modern numeration] renewing the matriculation of his father, Michele di Gherardo di Michele, a scarpellino who had joined the guild in 1473, both declaring themselves 'scarpellatore da

248




had a bottega in Florence but his family homestead was located on the northwest edge of Settignano, on high ground appropriate- ly called "Poggio" (Fig. 9).6 The property adjoined that of two of Michelangelo's closest assistants, Sandro di Poggio and his brother Topolino, quarry supervisers at Carrara to whom Ghe- rardo had ties beyond merely being neighbors.37 In addition, two of Gherardo's sons, Maso di Gherardo and Francesco del Poggio, were employed by Michelangelo as scarpellini at San Lo- renzo. Francesco, at least, was already working for Michelangelo at the time of his father's negotiations with the artist.?8 In fact, Michelangelo had employed Francesco as early as 1514, along with Bernardino Basso, in connection with the improvements made on the Buonarroti house in Via Ghibellina (Fig. 1 ).39 Finally, Ghe- rardo's daughter, Ismeralda, married Bernardino Basso's son, San- dro, who thereby inherited a portion of the Gherardo family property as part of Ismeralda's dowry (Table I).' Thus in the

Settignano" (ASF: maestri 4, fols. 210v-211r [modern numeration]). Members of the family lived in Fiesole, which undoubtedly was the loca-

tion of the stone quarries referred to by Gherardo. For example, a Gherardo di Nicholo di Gherardo lived in Fiesole (ASF: Dec. Rep. 245, fol. 399r), and a Domenico di Michele di Gherardo (possibly Gherardo di Michele's brother) lived at Monte Magherini, one of the principal sources of good quality macigno in Fiesole (ASF: Dec. Rep. 386, fol. 69r, and ASF: Dec. Rep. 245, fol. 396r). Other scarpellini lived at Monte Magherini, including the large Bozzolini clan who owned various cave in the area and two of whose members - Gianni and Benedetto - worked for Michelangelo at San Lorenzo (Ricordi, op. cit. [see note 12], passim; and, for example, ASF: Dec. Rep. 245, fols. 391v, 393v, 401v, and ASF: Decima Granducale [henceforth ASF: Dec. Gran.], 5341 [S. Giovanni, 1536], fol. 430v).

36 ASF: Dec. Rep. 245 (S. Giovanni, 1520), fols. 367v, 387r (his daughter's declaration) and his brother's property on fol. 364r.

37 For one, their families were bound by property ties. Topolino's daughter, Marietta, married Francesco d'Antonio di Piero whose property eventually passed to Gherardo's son Michele di Gherardo (ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341 [S. Giovanni, 1536] fols. 332v-333r; see also ASF: Dec. Rep. 245 [S. Giovanni, 1520], fols. 367v, 387r). Further, Topolino recommended that Michelangelo hire his son- in-law, Francesco, in August 1524, just about the time that Michelangelo was negotiating with Gherardo for stone (Carteggio, op. cit. [see note 1], III, p. 102).

38 He appears to have been employed at San Lorenzo from April 1524, and is frequently noted in Michelangelo's records thereafter (Ricordi, op. cit. [see note 12], p. 136 and passim).

39 Ibid., p. 8. Francesco del Poggio de' Gherardi was paid 5 lire to haul away twenty carrate of stone, "per 20 charata [...] levati de la via".

40 ASF: Dec. Rep. 245 (S. Giovanni, 1520) fol. 387r.

249



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

mid-1530s, Gherardo, Bernardino and Topolino are all cited as neiglhbors living in "Poggio"." Michelangelo, the Gherardi, and Bernardino, therefore, were well acquainted long before Gherardo and Michelangelo negotiated for stone in September 1524.

Bernardino subsequently figured prominently as a supplier of stone for San Lorenzo, possibly as kinsman and business associate of the Gherardi.42 For example, Bernardino Basso "e sua conpan-

41 Declaration of Francesco di Bartolomeo Dicenni (ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341, S. Giovanni, 1536, fol. 334v). Further, Sandro di Bernardino Basso was cited as the neighbor of the famous Settignanese family of sculptors and scarpellini, the Del Caprina, including Francesco di Zanobi del Caprina, the nephew of Luca del Caprina and Meo di Francesco del Caprina who lived next to Michele di Gherardo, Topolino, and Sandro di Poggio (ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341, fols. 333v, 395v; ASF: Dec. Rep. 242, fol. 85r; ASF: Dec. Rep. 252r, fols. 894r, 895r, 908r; ASF: Dec. Rep. 385, fol. 591r). The heirs of Luca del Caprina, moreover, stood as witness to Sandro di Poggio's matriculation into the guild of stone and woodworkers in 1504 (ASF: maestri 4, fols. 367v-368r [modern numeration]).

Richard Goldthwaite has noted the high degree of intermarriage among craft groups, which is certainly true with regard to Michelangelo's assistants (GOLDTHWAITE, op. cit. [see note 31], pp. 274-275; see also D. CARL, "Zur Goldschmiedefamilie Dei", Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz, XXVI, 1982, pp. 129ff; Y. EVEN, "Artistic Collaboration in Florentine Workshops (Quattrocento)", Ph. D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1984, and her forthcom- ing study, "The Artist as Entrepreneur: Long-term Professional Bonds in Quattro- cento Florence". On the importance of kinship and neighborhood ties in Florentine society, see CONTI, op. cit. (see note 7), pp. 40-43 and passim; D. HERLIHY and C. KLAPISCH-ZUBER, Les toscans et leurs familles, Paris, 1978; G. BRUCKER, The Civic World of Early Renaissance Florence, Princeton, 1977, esp. Chap. 1; F. W. KENT, Household and Lineage in Renaissance Florence: The Family Life of the Capponi, Ginori, and Rucellai, Princeton, 1977, esp. Chap. 5: "Neigh- bourhood, Patronage, and the Ancestors"; D. V. and F. W. KENT, Neighbours and Neighbourhood in Renaissance Florence: The District of the Red Lion in the Fifteenth Century, New York, 1982, and D. V. KENT, The Rise of the Medici Faction in Florence, 1426-1434, Oxford, 1978. For an earlier period, Charles De la Ronciere studied the extensive network of kinship, neighbors, and allies among a rural population which the Kents suggest survived into the Quattrocento, and I would suggest into the Cinquecento (C. DE LA RONCIiERE, " Solidarites familiales et lignageres dans la campagne toscane au XIVs: l'example d'un village de Valdelsa [1280-1350]", Civilt2 ed economia agricola in Toscana nei secc. XIII-XV: Problemi della vita delle campagne nel tardo medioevo, Pistoia, 1981, pp. 123-142, and KENT and KENT, Ioc. cit. [see note 7], p. 247. I would like to thank William Kent for the last two references).

42 Francesco del Poggio was one of the select group of marble carvers who worked closely with Michelangelo in the New Sacristy; however, he disappears from the lists of scarpellini between September 1524 and April 1525, a time which approximately coincides with the period between his father's offer to provide stone for Michelangelo and the beginning of work on the Laurentian

250




gni" submitted a bill for delivering 116 carrate of stone which Battista Figiovanni, a canon at San Lorenzo and the purveyor (provveditore) for Michelangelo's commissions there, asked the artist to approve since he had found the persons and arranged the contracts ("E' sono persone vostre e allogate da voi").43 By April 1526, Bernardino and his companions had delivered more than 1,700 lire worth of stone for the library reading room and vestibule (pietre date per la libreria e ricetto) as well as 1,586 lire worth of pietre per leghe (large pieces of stone used to bind together the brick or rubble masonry).44

In early 1525, Bernardino accepted an additional commission to provide stone for the new belltower of San Miniato al Monte designed by Baccio d'Agnolo. Between February and October 1525, Bernardino and two (different?) associates - Francesco di

Library. It is possible that Francesco worked with Bernardino in providing the stone for the library, thereby representing his father's interests in the operation. Gherardo, at fifty years of age and with a bottega in Florence, does not appear to have been actively involved in the quarrying operations. Instead, it would have been natural and acceptable to both Gherardo and Michelangelo to entrust the operation to Bernardino and possibly also to his kinsman Fran- cesco since the two already had experience working together for Michelangelo.

43 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, p. 128. Figiovanni's letter is undated but the 728 lire quoted would appear to be the running total of Bernar- dino's account for "pietre per leghe" delivered to San Lorenzo from before January 1525 ("per conto della libreria"), and prior to the end of the year when the account amounted to 1,586 lire (G. GRONAU, "Dokumente zur Entstehungs- geschichte der neun Sakristei und der Bibliothek von S. Lorenzo in Florenz", Jahrbuch der koniglich preussischen Kunstsammlungen, XXXII, Beiheft, 1911, pp. 73, 77, 81). Figiovanni mentions completing the account, yet Bernardino and his companions continue to supply stone to San Lorenzo until at least August 1526.

44 GRONAU, loc. cit. (see note 43), pp. 68, 70, 73-74, 76-77, 80-81, corroborated by the evidence in the two extant libretti discussed below (Ricordi, op. cit. [see note 12], pp. 202-211, 216-218).

"Leghe" is "pietre per fare lege per mettere nelle mura" (GRONAU, ibid., p. 81). See S. BATTAGLIA, Grande Dizionario della lingua Italiana, VIII, Turin, 1973, p. 882, s.v. Lega: "7. Archit. Grosso pezzo di pietra, legname o ferro usato da muratori per tenere insieme le pietre dei muri di un edificio in modo da renderli pitu solidi", citing Baldinucci: "legamenti, leghe: pietre di gran lun- ghezza e larghezza, con le quali usano di fermare ne' recinti e grossezze delle muraglie le parti di fuori con quelle di dentro... accioche le minori pietre di esse muraglie e ossami restino collegate e tengano pitu forte". Gherardo di Mi- chele mentioned that "caratte di leg[h]e" was already being delivered to San Lorenzo when he wrote Michelangelo at the end of September 1524 (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 107).

251



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

Jacopo and Domenico di Piero da Settignano - received regular weekly payments for stone they delivered to the construction site at San Miniato.45 Thus, Bernardino, as an independent artisan and through one or more partnerships, was delivering stone to two different sites simultaneously in 1525. During this same period, however, he also regularly appears on the weekly payroll at San Lorenzo: the extant documents for the two commissions over- lap for more than six months (Table II).

In the San Miniato accounts, the weekly payments are mostly made to Bernardino's compatriot Francesco, occasionally to Do- menico, but never to Bernardino himself. The documents suggest that Bernardino was the principal party in the contract with the monks of San Miniato, and perhaps responsible for its fulfill- ment, but was not necessarily involved in the daily operation of quarrying and hauling stone. In fact, according to Michelangelo's weekly scarpellini lists, Bernardino spent the majority of his time at San Lorenzo, on average, more than five days a week.

It was common practice - particularly in the art and building trades - for persons to be simultaneously employed on more than one commission, and there is ample evidence of such practice among some of Michelangelo's assistants.' Thus, like many other stone-

45 The payments averaged 7 '2 florins per week and altogether totalled 285 large gold florins (ASF: Conv. Sopp.. CLXVIII, S. Miniato 169, Libro di spese nella fabbrica del campanile di S. Miniato 1525 [n.s.] - 1526, fols. 17v-20v). Richard Goldthwaite mistakenly cited this as a contract to carve the cornice and frieze of the San Miniato belltower which, in fact, was carried out by Bernardino's neighbor and fellow assistant of Michelangelo, Francesco del Lucchesino, as is recorded later in the same libro di spese (GOLDTHWAITE, op. cit.

[see note 31], p. 231, n. 100, and ASF: Conv. Sopp., CLXVIII, S. Miniato 169, fols. 26v-30r).

46 See, for example, Richard Goldthwaite's discussion of Cronaca's numerous simultaneous obligations in GOLDTHWAITE, Ioc. cit. (see note 31), pp. 129- 131. Among Michelangelo's assistants, Donato Benti and Michele di Piero Pippo (and others) were employees of the Opera del Duomo at the same time they worked for Michelangelo. In addition, it was typical of the cathedral foreman to work concurrently on other projects as in the case of Andrea Ferrucci who worked part-time for Michelangelo at San Lorenzo, first on the fagade and subsequently as a capomaestro at the New Sacristy (for this dual employment, see GOLDTHWAITE, op. cit. [see note 31], pp. 149-150, and MUSTARI, op. cit. [see note 33], pp. 263-265). Domenico Fancelli carried out independent commissions even while under contract to provide marble for Miche- langelo from Carrara. Francesco da Sangallo and Silvio Cosini are two further examples of independent sculptors who appeared to have had several commis-

252



%0

00

co m o >~~c

N 00

00

'0 00

- W n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c

o~~~% v ,

*aa < S; ~ I - ~

?: S \~0 00

22~25

CT~ 2 - 0

;Y~~ -

%0 ~ 25



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

masons, Bernardino occupied a post on one building project and took a contract on another, thereby working as a wage earner and an independent contractor at the same time.47 Yet, Bernar- dino was actually providing stone by contract to two different building sites in 1525, while also earning a weekly wage at San Lorenzo, a situation complicated by the fact that he was both a wage earner and a contractor at San Lorenzo. He earned eighteen soldi for every day he worked at the site, and in addition, his partnership was paid for the quantity of stone they delivered to San Lorenzo between September 1524 and August 1526.

Several additional notices help clarify Bernardino's multifaceted role during this period. In addition to his weekly wage, a variety of lesser services performed for Michelangelo attest to Bernardino's regular presence around the building site at San Lorenzo. For example, Topolino wrote to Michelangelo from the marble quarries on Christmas day 1524, asking Bernardino to assure his wife that he was in good health.' On 3 April 1525, Michelangelo reimbursed Bernardino for purchasing three sheets of tin to make templates for the exterior windows of the Laurentian Library.49 In June 1526, Michelangelo sent Bernardino with twenty soldi for his neighbor on Via Ghibellina as payment for having the well cleaned, and in August he sent him to Pietrasanta to obtain a reckoning of expenses incurred in quarrying marble.'

sions even while working for Michelangelo. These persons, their work at San Lorenzo, their relationships with Michelangelo and with each other are the subject of a book I am writing on Michelangelo and his assistants.

47 Francesco Lucchesini (or del Lucchesino), for example, was paid a task rate for carving the cornice and frieze of the belltower of San Miniato during the same period he was providing macigno, albeit a small amount, for the library at San Lorenzo (see note 45, and GRONAU, IcC. cit. [see note 43], pp. 73, 76, 79); see also D. KNooP-G. P. JONES, "The Rise of the Mason Contractor", Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects, XLIII, 1937, pp. 1061, 1067. The authors cite cases where stonemasons earned a day rate at the same time they were paid for task work (pp. 1062-1063, 1067), and note 'no lack of examples of quarrymasters who continued to supply not only stone but workmanship for erecting a building" (p. 1066); idem, "The English Medieval Quar- ry", Economic History Review, IX, 1938, pp. 26-27, and idem, The London Mason in the Sixteenth Century, Manchester-London, 1935, esp. pp. 32-39.

48 25 December 1524 (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 123). 49 3 April 1525 (Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], p. 133). 50 Ibid., pp. 224, 218.

254




Even more revealing than these incidental notices is the occasional mention of Bernardino in Michelangelo's correspondence. In a letter written in February 1525, Michelangelo's father, Lodo- vico Buonarroti, mentioned that Bernardino had informed him that Michelangelo was having trouble concerning negotiations to purchase some property in Settignano. Bernardino was Lodovico's informant regarding Michelangelo's frustrations as well as the bearer of the return missive. This exchange is both an indication of Bernardino's familiarity with the Buonarroti and their personal affairs, and testimony of his frequent movement between Florence and Settignano, probably in connection with the quarrying and delivery of stone to San Lorenzo in early 1525.5'

A further letter from Lodovico colorfully illustrates the extent to which the everyday affairs of the Buonarroti and Bassi were intermingled. The missive is an irate enumeration of the rascali- ties perpetrated by Bernardino and Lapo, the Buonarroti tenant farmer in Settignano.52 According to Lodovico, it would require a book to recount all their misdeeds, and although he claims the impossibility of the task, his valiant effort makes for some lurid reading. In the first place, Lapo had been cheating Lodovico by giving the best produce from the Buonarroti farm each year to Bernardino. Among various other deceptions, Bernardino stole six florins and a jewel (una pietra) from Lodovico as well as a ring worth twenty florins. Then, astonishingly, Bernardino talk- ed Michelangelo into giving away the house of their farmer, Ba- stiano Balena, yet - according to Lodovico - Michelangelo remains ignorant of his assistant's knavery. Moreover, for every three florins of stone Bernardino quarried for Michelangelo, he was tak- ing one for himself, a revelation which confirms Bernardino's entrepreneurial activity in the stone trade. Lodovico learned all this from Piero Basso, Bernardino's octogenarian father who, thor-

51 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, p. 135. Further evidence of a similar sort is found in another letter to Michelangelo (close in date and possibly related in content) in which his father mentions that the bearer, Bernardo (most likely, Bernardino Basso) will inform Michelangelo verbally, "chome ti dira Bernardo" (Carteggio indiretto, cit. [see note 11], I, p. 243).

52 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, pp. 196-197, but see also the related letter, ibid., pp. 198-199. I would like to thank Michael Sherberg for assisting with the reading and interpretation of this letter.

255



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

oughly ashamed of his son's behavior, wanted to murder him. The reprobate Bernardino, evidently fearing his father's wrath, had not eaten at home for several days and had elected to sleep in the orchard. Bernardino, it might be noted, was fifty years old at the time.

Unfortunately, Michelangelo's response to his father's infu- riated letter does not survive but there is no indication of a rup- ture between Michelangelo and his wayward assistant. And even the outraged Lodovico appears eventually to have forgiven Ber- nardino. Following the hardships of the Last Republic, for instance, Michelangelo sent Bernardino several times to Settignano to deliver money to his father.53 In subsequent years, Bernardino continued to serve Michelangelo in a familiar and useful capacity, as a messenger, a collector of rents, and as a witness in the purchase of materials and an intermediary in transactions with Mi- chelangelo's farmers.54 Thus, more than merely a professional colleague, Bernardino was intimate with the Buonarroti family and their private affairs, which undoubtedly was part of the reason for the friction with Michelangelo's father.55 Yet, despite occasional problems with Bernardino, Michelangelo continued to employ him and eventually, in the early 1530s, entrusted him with overseeing the entire building operation at San Lorenzo.

Bernardino's role in Michelangelo's commissions at San Loren-

53 Ricordi, cit. (see note 12), p. 273. 54 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, pp. 321, 385; Ricordi, cit. (see note

12), pp. 192, 263, 270, 272, 276 and the unpublished ricordo recently sold at Sotheby's (Catalogue of Fine Books and Manuscripts, 14 February 1986, Lot no. 498), which notes that Bernardino witnessed "in casa mia a Sa[n] Lo- re [n]zo" a payment for tiles used to roof the lantern of the Medici Chapel (WALLACE, Ioc. cit. [see note 27]).

55 As is suggested by Lodovico's vituperative letter (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, pp. 196-197), it seems that the Bassi might have shared in the annual production of the Buonarroti properties according to the ancient mezzadria system of land tenure, for which see CONTI, op. cit, (see note 7), II, pp. lOff, 40 and passim, and M. S. MAzzI-S. RAVEGGI, Gli uomini e le cose nelle campagne fiorentine del Quattrocento, Florence, 1983. As in the case of several other close friends and assistants, such as Giuliano Bugiardini or Meo delle Chorte, Michelangelo sometimes helped Bernardino by selling him grain, as in the case of the thirty-two staia he sold Bernardino in October 1526 (Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], p. 226).

256




zo is most fully documented in three record books (libretti) relat- ing to the delivery and carving of macigno for the Laurentian Library.56 The three libretti cover the period from April 1525 to August 1526 and account for more than one third of the macigno used for the interior wall decoration of the library reading room (Fig. 7) and approximately one half of all the macigno in the library vestibule (Fig. 8). An examination of the persons mentioned in these libretti reveals that all the suppliers of stone were interrelated and acquainted with Michelangelo before they were employed in connection with the library. Not unexpected- ly, although it has not hitherto been demonstrated, Michelangelo relied on a network of extended family and professional ties in contracting for the large quantity of stone used to build and decorate the library. He thereby minimized the limitations of most Renaissance quarrying operations which tended to be small in scale, and he insured an uninterrupted flow of uniformly high quality material. Bernardino was an integral part of this large and well-coordinated operation.

Bernardino and two "chonpagni" - Meo di Chimenti and Ba- stiano di Francesco - are documented in two of the libretti relat- ing to the building of the library vestibule. The books are in the same unknown hand, and are related: the first is a record of blocks delivered to San Lorenzo by eleven different carters, and the second records the names of more than ffty scarpellini assigned to carve the roughed-out blocks into finished pieces.'

Bartolomeo (Meo) di Chimenti di Bruno owned "una cava di staiora 2 in circha" with his brother Jacopo di Chimenti in the parish of Sta. Maria a Vincigliata, yet he probably lived in Set- tignano where his father was an innkeeper.' Indeed, Michelan- gelo sold thirty-one barrels of wine to Meo's father in November 1525, just about the time that Meo began providing stone for San Lorenzo.59 Most of Meo's relations lived in Settignano around a place called "Feliceto" which is directly adjacent to Poggio (Fig.

- Ibid., pp. 187-191, 202-211, 216-218; see also, GRONAU, Ioc. cit. (see note 43), pp. 68, 70, 73, 74, 76, 80.

5 Ricordi, cit. (see note 12), pp. 202-211, 216-218. i ASF: Dec. Rep. 245 (S. Giovanni, 1520) fol. 428v. 59 Ricordi, cit. (see note 12), pp. 199-200.

257



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

9). Meo's family, therefore, were neighbor's of the Gherardi, Bernardino Basso, Topolino, and several other scarpellini who worked for Michelangelo at San Lorenzo.' These neighborhood ties in themselves might explain Meo's involvement with supplying stone for San Lorenzo, but in addition, he was part of the very large Fancelli clan, eight of whom were employed at various times by Michelangelo (Table III). The Fancelli, a noted family of sculptors, stonemasons, and architects continuing well into the 17th century, had assisted Michelangelo with quarrying operations since 1505. They were among his principal overseers in the marble quarries at Carrara and Seravezza, who included Bernardino Basso's friend and Meo's distant kinsman, Topolino. Thus, Meo belonged to a family with much experience in the building trades and a long history of service to Michelangelo.6"

60 For example, Baldino da Feliceto and his brother, Piero della Bella, and Giovan Turco all were scarpellini who worked at San Lorenzo and lived in the immediate vicinity of one another. Baldino is identified as living at Feli- ceto merely on the basis of his name but Piero della Bella is documented owning property there (ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341 [S. Giovanni, 1536], fols. 380r and 322v). Giovan Turco is probably Giovanni d'Andrea who was the son of Andrea di Giovanni del Lucchesino detto Turco (d. 1520) who worked for Michelangelo quarrying marble for the fa4ade of San Lorenzo (ASF: maestri, fols. 432v-433r, 501r [modern numeration]; Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], II, pp. 59n, 157-158, 161, and Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], pp. 74, 95, and passim). Giovan Turco's brother, Francesco del Lucchesino contracted to provide stone for the New Sacristy in 1520-1521 (C. ELAM, "The Site and Early Building History of Michelangelo's New Sacristy", Mitteilungen des Kunst- historischen Institutes in Florenz, XXIII, 1979, doc. 5, p. 178); moreover, he and Giovan Turco's two sons contracted to carve the stairs and two doors for the Laurentian Library in 1533 (MILANESI, op. cit. [see note 30], p. 707). Altogether five Lucchesini worked for Michelangelo, and they lived at "Poggio" and "Croce di Via" next to Topolino, Sandro di Poggio, the Gherardi and other Michelangelo assistants (see, for example, ASF: Dec. Rep. 252, fol. 894r; ASF: Dec. Rep. 245, fol. 370v; ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341, fols. 332v-333r, and Ricordi, op. cit. [see note 12], p. 95 and passim).

61 Indeed, there is a long history of Fancelli employment on Medici commissions, including San Lorenzo. For example, Sandro and Topolino's father, Giovanni di Bertino, is documented as a "scarpellatore" at San Lorenzo in 1449 (I. HYMAN, "Notes and Speculations on S. Lorenzo, Palazzo Medici, and an Urban Project by Brunelleschi", Journal of the Society of the Architectural Historians, XXXIV, 1975, pp. 104, 110). Another relation of Meo di Chimenti, the comparatively wealthy Francesco di Stoldo di Piero del Fancello, also lived in Settignano, owned property in Fiesole, and owned stone quarries in the same vicinity as Meo (S. Maria in Vincigliata), which he purchased from the

258



.0

o 2

Q -0

I ~~~~~~~~~~0.0

00.

<Z

C ~~~~~~~C0

0 08~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ - --C 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~00C0 V

0 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~E0> o --~~~n 00.Z0N

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ :6~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

H 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*z

0 .2 .2 0~~25



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

Bernardino's other " chonpagno " was Bastiano di Francesco. Bastiano, known familiarly as "Bargiaca", was a scarpellino from Fiesole first employed by Michelangelo in the New Sacristy in 1524 to prepare the vault and plumb the coffers prior to stuc- coing.62 Bargiaca suffered an unfortunate fall from the scaffolding; however, following a rapid recovery, we find him among the select group of carvers working on the Medici tombs alongside Miche- langelo. He is regularly listed on the weekly rosters until mid- 1525 when, in company with Bernardino Basso, he began serving Michelangelo in a different capacity; that is, providing stone for the Laurentian Library.63 Bargiaca also owned a stone quarry which can be precisely located at a place called Doccia on the steep south-

well known family of quarrymen, the Alessandri (ASF: Dec. Rep. 385, fols. 619r-620v; ASF: Dec. Rep. 245, fols. 365v, 421v, 429r; and on the Alessandri, see also H. SAALMAN, "I Tatti in 1427", Essays Presented to Myron P. Gilmore, ed. S. BERTELLI-G. RAMAKUS, Florence, 1978, II, pp. 353-356).

Alternatively, the Meo di Chimenti mentioned in the two libretti may be another scarpellino of the same name from Settignano. He was an employee of the Opera del Duomo and was on familiar terms with Michelangelo from at least 1513 (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], I, pp. 142-143) but probably much earlier since he was a relation and neighbor of many other assistants of Michelangelo in Settignano including the Bassi. For example, this Meo was a cousin and "chompagno" of Michele di Piero Pippo, one of Michelangelo's longest standing assistants. Meo was born in 1487 (ASF: Dec. Rep. 385, fol. 575r) and was matriculated in the guild of stone and woodworkers in 1511 (ASF: Maestri 2, fol. 177v [modern numeration]) and lived in Settignano at "Croce di Via" along with his cousin Michele and many other Michelangelo assistants, including the Lucchesini and Meo delle Chorte. Meo di Chimenti and his cousin Michele were both employed by Michelangelo to provide marble for the faqade of San Lorenzo in 1518-1519, and by the cathedral following the cancellation of Michelangelo's contract (see Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], p. 355, Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], passim, and Pisa, Archivio Salviati 629 [Quaderno di Cassa, 1519-1521], fol. 127 left & right), thus possibly recom- mending him for similar service in providing macigno for San Lorenzo in 1525- 1526. Moreover, Michele di Meo, a scarpellino employed at San Lorenzo from October 1524 is probably his son (Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], p. 151 and passim).

62 Ibid., p. 115 where he is identified as "Bastiano, detto Ba[r]giacha, scharpellino da Fiesole".

63 Ibid., p. 161. Bargiaca's importance to Michelangelo is indicated by the fact that he actually requested a 'leave of absence' in November 1524. Such a relationship is in marked contrast to the endemic instability of Renaissance labor, particularly in the building trades (GOLDTHWAITE, op. cit. [see note 31], p. 147).

260




western slope of Mount Ceceri near Fiesole.TM At Pelagaccio, less than three hundred meters distance, were other quarries which yielded stone for the Laurentian Library.

The third libretto associated with the library records more than two hundred roughed-out blocks which were delivered to San Lo- renzo by Romolo di Guelfo and Giovanni di Sandro. Both were scarpellini whose families had been neighbors for at least three generations at Pelagaccio and had worked the stone quarries there.' Romolo di Guelfo and his brother Antonio contracted to provide stone for the New Sacristy on 14 April 1522.' Romolo di Guelfo's son, Giovanni Romolo di Guelfo, is documented delivering stone, identified as from Pelagaccio, "per una finestra della liberria" in February 1525.67 Then between April and August 1525, Romolo and his neighbor/partner, Giovanni di Sandro, delivered macigno for the wall membering and windows of the library reading room.'

Giovanni di Sandro's father, Sandro di Giovanni di Sandro, had been a major supplier of pietra serena for the Strozzi palace

64 "La cava d [e]l barg [i] accha" is mentioned in the text accompanying a drawn survey map of Fiesole from 1566, in itself an indication of the size or importance of this quarry since few others are so identified (ASF: Capitani di Parte, Piante di Popoli e Strade 118, II, 7, fol. 295r, Canonica di Fiesole. I am grateful to William Connell for directing my attention to this source). The fact that the quarry was still identified by Bargiaca's name in the mid- sixteenth century may be a further indication of its size, significance, and continuous operation.

65 G. CAROCCI, I Dintorni di Firenze, I, Rome, 1906, rpt. 1968, p. 149; ASF: Dec. Rep. 386 (S. Giovanni, 1504), fols. 109r-v, 252r-v; ASF: Dec. Rep. 245 (S. Giovanni, 1520), fol. 407v; ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341 (S. Giovanni, 1536), fols. 439v, 478v. Goldthwaite has emphasized the small size of most quarries, the importance of family traditions, and the highly personal forms of cooperation among local quarrymen (GOLDTHWAITE, op. cit. [see note 31], p. 219; see also KNOOP-JONES, "English Quarry", cit. [see note 47], pp. 17-37).

66 Published in ELAM, loc. cit. (see note 60), doc. 6, pp. 178-179 and her discussion, p. 168. This contract is a little more than a year after Francesco del Lucchesino also contracted to provide stone for the New Sacristy (ibid., p. 178, and GRONAU, IcC. cit. [see note 43], pp. 73, 76, 79). Thus Francesco - Bernardino Basso's neighbor and colleague at both San Lorenzo and San Miniato (see notes 45, 60 herein) - is part of the chain of relationships that link together the various persons associated with supplying macigno for San Lorenzo.

6 Ricordi, op. cit. (see note 12), p. 164. 68 Ibid., pp. 187-191.

261



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

in the 1490s.69 Furthermore, Sandro owned a bottega "a uso di scharpellino" in Piazza S. Giovanni in Florence, as well as a mule worth eight florins used to haul stone (el quale ad opera a por- tare pietre).70 Such a notice is unusual in the normally laconic tax declarations of the Decima della Repubblica and indicates, along with Sandro's other assets, that the family quarrying business was well-established, profitable, and of good size. Obviously, these would have been important considerations for Michelangelo.

In addition, both the Guelfi and the Sandri had houses in Florence ("laquale abita quando viene a Firenze" declared Ro- molo's father) in the same neighborhood - San Pier Maggiore - where Michelangelo's family lived for some years when he was a young man.7' It is likely that Michelangelo was at least familiar with the Guelfi and Sandri long before he sought their services for San Lorenzo. Antonio and Romolo di Guelfo, moreover, not only worked quarries near Bargiaca, but possibly were also his first cousins, thereby completing a chain of family, professional, and neighborhood relationships which link together all the suppliers of macigno named in the three libretti.72 Indeed, the rela-

69 GOLDTHWAITE, loc. cit. (see note 31), p. 155. One of his compagni was Jacopo di Chimenti who may be Meo di Chimenti's brother.

70 ASF: Dec. Rep. 386 (S. Giovanni, 1504), fol. 252r-v. Goldthwaite cited the example of the quarryman Antonio di Tomma who also declared a mule, "most likely standard equipment in this line of work" (GOLDTHWAITE, op. cit. [see note 31], p. 229). While this is surely true, mules were not normally declared on the tax returns of the Decima. In fact, I found only this one example among the thousands of portate that I have examined from Fiesole and Settignano for the years 1504, 1512, 1520, and 1534.

71 Declaration of Romolo's father, Guelfo d'Antonio di Nanni (ASF: Dec. Rep. 386 [S. Giovanni, 1504], fols. 109r-v). The Buonarroti lived in S. Pier Maggiore after moving from their house on Via Bentaccordi sometime prior to 1498 (ASF: Dec. Rep. 16 [Sta. Croce, 1498], fols. 353r-v; published by FREY and GRIMM, loc. cit. [see note 3], pp. 195-198). Sandro di Giovanni di Sandro owned a "casolare" in Via Nuova, popolo di S. Pier Maggiore which he declared as alienated property on his tax declaration of 1504 (ASF: Dec. Rep. 386, fol. 252r-v).

n Bargiaca's father, Bastiano di Francesco d'Antonio, was the son of Francesco d'Antonio di Nanni, brother of Guelfo d'Antonio di Nanni whose sons were Antonio di Guelfo and Romolo di Guelfo (ASF: Dec. Rep. 386 [S. Giovanni, 1504], fol. 109r-v, and ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341 [S. Giovanni, 1536] fol. 434v). For reasons of space and clarity, this relationship is not diagrammed in Table IV.

262




tionships are so numerous and varied that it is useful to diagram them (Table IV), although it is obvious that such a scheme over- simplifies a more complicated picture. In part, however, it does demonstrate how Michelangelo utilized an interrelated network of quarrymen and scarpellini, some of whom, a generation earlier, had helped build the Strozzi palace, a gigantic construction which called for a similarly well-developed organization of labor and materials.

It is reasonable that Michelangelo wished to have all the library stone quarried from approximately the same location and by related and well-established business enterprises. He could not afford mishaps or inefficiency, especially after mid-1525 when there were more than one hundred scarpellini at San Lorenzo prepared to carve the stone as it was delivered by the quarrymen.

The importance and logistics of supplying the material in a continuous and well-coordinated manner is made manifest by an examination of one of the libretti in graphic form (Table V). The graph shows that the roughed-out blocks were delivered in the approximate order they were used in building the vestibule. Blocks for the lower story were delivered before those for the main story, which in turn preceded the blocks for the main story tabernacles, with the uppermost entablature being delivered last. More specifically, for example, the lower story base blocks, baseboard molding, and consoles were all delivered by mid-February with the bulk of the lower story cornice and main story base delivered between February and April. It is obvious that the consoles had to be walled into place before the columns could be set in the niches above them, just as the corner columns had to precede the tabernacles whose pediments effectively close them into their constricted corner spaces. Similarly, bases had to be carved before the columns, and capitals could only be used once the columns were in place. There was no reason, therefore, to deliver the blocks for the main story entablature until July when the upper wall of the vestibule had been completed. The delivery of bases, columns, and capitals is staggered in a manner which suggests that the quarrying, delivery, and allocation of blocks for carving was a planned and efficiently directed operation. Indeed, it was running so smoothly in 1526 that on June 17 Michelangelo confidently reported to Rome that five columns were in place, the

263



03

o~~~~ 00

o; 40 S~

I

S DI~~~~~~~

264

U 0 0~~~~~~~~~~ U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I~~~~~~~~

0 ~ ~ 0

0 0.0. a o~~~~~~~~1

264 ~ ~aS C




LIBRETTO RECORDING TIHE DELIVERY OF MACIGNO FOR THE LAURENTIAN LIBRARY VESTIBULE

11 DECEMBER 1525.2 AUGUST 1526

1525) 1526) Blocks December January February March April Mlay June July

Main Story / 30531 Entablature/br. , |

Tabernacle blocks -

- soglie 15 |7 - st p 21174 - regoloni/br. - 25.5 3.33 Z - fodere 4. .4 5 - cornice 4. 3 1| tr - frontone 1 2 1

Pilasters 3 1'

Column Capitals I 2 2

Columns Z

Column Bases 2 2 3 2 - 1 1 ,

Main Story Base 19.4 37 3.33: (regoloni)/br.

Lower Story Cornice ! 2 2.5 10.8 .12.8 15 . (cimasa)/br.

Consoles 2- (mensole) t

Lower Story Molding 6 - .29.5 (ghiere)/br. -

0 Baseboard Molding 74.8 1.1.5. 3 7 .

(schaglione)/br. '' ' -

Base Block 12.5 4 4 5.33 (imbasamento)/braccia

Misc. Blocks | 1 7 | 3 4 6 ( | 2 9 2 1 1

Table V

265



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

tabernacles would follow shortly, and the entire vestibule would be completed in four months.73

The careful coordination of materials and labor is further confirmed by comparing the information contained in the two related libretti pertaining to stone delivered by Bernardino and his part- ners. The first libretto, just discussed, records blocks that they delivered to San Lorenzo between December 1525 and August 1526, and the second is a running account of the assignment of some of these blocks to the scarpellini to be carved into finished pieces. An examination of three types of blocks (parts for the vestibule tabernacles) reveals a correlation between the delivery of stone and its final carving: a piece was delivered to San Lorenzo and shortly after it was assigned to be finished (Table VI). As might be expected, maximum efficiency in coordinating materials and labor was attained during the good weather and long hours of the summer months.

There must have been a certain amount of 'stockpiling' at the quarries to ensure a smooth and regular delivery of parts to the site. Space and availability of equipment had to be considered, particularly large items such as hoists to move and lift the columns into place. In fact, each column is indicated by a small sketch in the margin of the libretto (Fig. 10) suggesting the singular importance (and expense) of these items as well as the fact that their delivery to San Lorenzo must have been carefully regulated."4 When Figiovanni pulled some carters off the job in June 1526, Michelangelo was concerned that the scarpellini would be left without a sufficient supply of stone. It was even important that Figiovanni - looking to cut costs - should not encourage the carters to work shorter hours since this too would threaten the well- coordinated delivery of materials."

"Del ricecto, di questa sectimana s'e murato quatro cholonne, e una n'era murata prima. Terranno un pocho a dietro e' tabernacholi: pure, in quatro mesi da oggi credo sara fornito" (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 227).

74 Archivio Buonarroti II-III, n. 66, fols. 2v-3r. According to an undated ricordo in Michelangelo's hand, the cost of a column with base and capital was 1,880 soldi, compared to 220 soldi for each console (295 soldi for the double consoles), or 960 soldi to carve one of the tabernacles decorating the main story (Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], p. 214).

75 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, p. 228. On the importance of coor-

266




COMPARISONS OF SELECTED TABERNACLE PARTS DELIVERED AND ASSIGNED TO BE CUT FOR VESTIBULE TABERNACLES

Dates of Ricordi Pilasters (stipiti) Rear Tabernacle Slab Cornice (fodere)

1526 Delivered Assigned Delivered Assigned Delivered Assigned

April 18 2 April 26 2 April 27 1 April 30 3 May 2 2 May 4 1 1 May 5 May 81 May 9 May 11 1 May 121 May 14 2 1 May 16 2 May 17 1 1 May 18 1 May 19 1 May 23 2 May 24 2 May 23 May 26 1 1 2 May 28 2 4 2 June 5 2~ 1 June 72 June 834 2 June I112 June 122 June 131 June 14 1 June 161 June 22 3 June 23 11

TOTALS: 18 17 14 13 8 7

Table VI

267



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

Michelangelo was instrumental in setting up this operation, selecting the quarrymen, checking stone samples, making drawings and templates, anticipating the sequence of work, and helping to keep the whole enterprise running smoothly. However, his principal efforts in 1526, in accordance with the repeated wishes of the pope, were directed to carving the marble figures in the New Sacristy. The seemingly contradictory evidence reveals an artist with an immense capacity to immerse himself equally in the mun- dane and the sublime, in effective business management and artistic creation. It also suggests that, in addition to the purveyor, Bat- tista Figiovanni, Michelangelo relied upon assistants to oversee various aspects of the enormously complicated operation.

Of necessity, Michelangelo entrusted the day-to-day supervision of the quarrying, transport, and much of the carving to one or more trusted capomaestri, perhaps including Bernardino Basso. Bernardino's numerous relations with the quarrymen and his evident entrepreneurial skills' in supplying stone for large- scale building operations made him eminently suited for this task at San Lorenzo. Yet, he was more than merely a principal supplier of stone. His name is prominent in the documents, recorded in such various capacities that he stands apart from most of the other assistants at San Lorenzo and from all the other suppliers of building stone. Bernardino and Meo delle Chorte, the capomaestro of the marble carvers in the New Sacristy, are the only two assistants who were paid a regular weekly wage at the same time they were remunerated for stone delivered to the building site.76 Bernardino, moreover, worked more consistently and for a total of more days than any other assistant employed on the library

dinating the supply and working of materials for a large construction project, see 0. LUFTI BARKEN, aL'organisation du travail dans le chantier d'une grande mosquee a Istanbul au XVIe sicle", Annales: Economies, Societes, Civi- lisations, XVII, 1962, pp. 1093-1106, esp. 1096-1097; G. KUBLER, Building the Escorial, Princeton, 1982, and E. E. ROSENTHAL, The Palace of Charles V in Granada, Princeton, 1985.

76 GRONAU, loc. cit. (see note 43, p. 73). Bargiaca first worked for a wage and appears regularly on the scarpellini lists until April 1525, but disap- peared from the lists once he began supplying stone in company with Bernardino. None of the other stone suppliers appears on the scarpellini lists as wage earners.

268




construction. From April 1525, his name is always first on the weekly lists of scarpellini working on the library, which parallels the manner in which Michelangelo listed Meo delle Chorte, the capomaestro at the New Sacristy.7 His familiarity and long-term collaboration with Michelangelo, and his subsequent appointment as overall capomaestro at San Lorenzo, suggests that by 1526 Ber- nardino was already serving in a partly supervisory capacity at the Laurentian Library. Unfortunately, the documents, although rich in factual information, are poor in describing precise duties. Nonetheless, regardless of Bernardino's exact role in the enterprise, the library is mute testimony to Michelangelo's willingness to dele- gate authority and collaborate with assistants.

* * *

Work on the sacristy and library slowed down during the latter part of 1526 due to a gradual drying up of funds. With the expulsion of the Medici in 1527 and the establishment of the ill-fated Last Republic (1527-1530), work came to a standstill. Michelangelo's attention switched from the Medici commissions to the defense of Florence. As Governor and Procurator General of the city's fortifications, he was responsible for designing and overseeing construction of the defensive works, a gigantic building operation that employed, by decree of the Signoria, every male between eighteen and fifty years of age including, most likely, many who had worked with Michelangelo at San Lorenzo.78 In June 1529, for example, Bernardino Basso, together with his former partner, Meo di Chimenti, and a building superviser at the New Sacristy, Bernardo Pistochi, tendered to dig the ditches for the

77 In analyzing a similar set of documents associated with Troyes cathedral, Stephen Murray drew similar conclusions regarding the relative importance of persons in the workshop (MuRRAY, op. cit. [see note 33], p. 67), as did Mustari in analyzing the organization of the Florentine Opera del Duomo, (MUSTARI, op. cit. [see note 33], p. 166 and n. 442). Martin Weinberger referred to Ber- nardino as the "head mason" (M.. WEINBERGER, Michelangelo the Sculptor, 2 vols., London, New York, 1967, I, p. 295).

78 ASF: Signori e Collegi, Deliberazioni Duplicati 44, fol. 463v. For the fortifications, see R. MANETTI, Michelangiolo: le fortificazioni per l'assedio di Firenze, Florence, .1980, and W. WALLACE, "Dal disegno allo spazio: Miche- langelo's Drawings for the Fortifications of Florence", Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, XLVI, 1987, pp. 119-134.

269



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

bastions outside Porta San Miniato. It is uncertain whether Michelangelo hired Bernardino for the job, but it seems likely.79

Shortly before the siege of the city in October 1529, Miche- langelo fled to Venice. In his absence, two of Michelangelo's oldest and most trusted friends, Bernardino Basso and Francesco Gra- nacci, looked after some of the master's affairs.' These same long- standing family friends, together with their compatriot, Bargiaca, raised the money to send the latter to Venice in order to persuade Michelangelo to return to Florence.8" Of course, the official pardon extended to Michelangelo by the government of Florence made it possible for him to return, yet Bargiaca's unofficial embassy - a dangerous undertaking in the midst of war - and the large number of letters from friends that he carried with him to Venice, must also have played a part in persuading him.

Michelangelo resumed work on the Medici commissions following the collapse of the Republic in 1530. His salary was restored in December and he began working "con diligentia et sollecitu- dine", although Condivi noted that now he was "driven more by fear than by love".82 It is evident that after the extended interlude of the Republic, Michelangelo no longer felt the same commitment to the Medici commissions. More work was turned over to assistants and he spent increasingly longer periods in Rome, partly because of his disillusionment following the Republic and partly because of his new friendship with Tommaso de' Cavalieri.

79 Archivio Buonarroti IIJ-II, no. 72, dated 17 June 1529. I would like to thank Caroline Elam for generously sharing this unpublished document with me. She also noted that contracts obtained by open tender were rare in Florence. Perhaps the unusual procedure is explained by the strategically sensi- tive nature of the commission. In May 1529, for example, Michelangelo requested and had sent to him (rather than hiring outright on his own authority) ten "maestri di murare" to assist in building the fortifications (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 271). Over three hundred persons were working on the bastions around San Miniato by the summer, including twenty-one "maestri", and six unnamed "legnaiuoli e scarpellini" (Ricordi, cit. [see note 12], pp. 252-253).

80 Ibid., p. 263. See, for example, the record of a payment that Bernardino made in Michelangelo's name to the kilnmaster, Jacopo di Filippo in September 1529 and the accounts kept by Granacci (pp. 264-265).

81 Ibid., pp. 265-266 and Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, pp. 282-283. 8 CONDIVI, cit. (see note 6), p. 45.

270




Bernardino was designated capomnaestro at San Lorenzo and was left in charge of overseeing the work during Michelangelo's long and frequent absences.' In addition to a supervisory role at the Laurentian Library, Bernardino was responsible for carrying out Michelangelo's design for a Reliquary Tribune balcony in the same church (Fig. 11). This large but little noted project was a high priority of Pope Clement VII who earnestly desired to transfer a valuable legacy - the Medici collection of relics and precious vases - from Rome to the relative safekeeping of Florence. At the pope's insistence, Michelangelo designed the balcony which was erected over the main portal on the inside fagade of the church where it served both as a safe repository for the treasures and a magnificent setting for their ceremonial display.' The reliquary balcony is large but blends unobtrusively with the Quattrocento church designed by Filippo Brunelleschi. The fact that it was carried out largely by assistants under Bernardino's direction may account for the scant attention given this commission; however, a closer examination of its history and the finished project proves the neglect unwarranted.

In late August or early September 1532, Michelangelo departed for Rome leaving Bernardino, now fifty-seven years old, in charge of all the San Lorenzo commissions. Bernardino had already delivered the roughed out blocks for the bases, capitals, and coping for the tribune balcony, as well as the two monolithic columns that support it.85 In the following months, while Miche- langelo was in Rome, Bernardino supervised the final carving and construction. In letters reporting on the balcony's progress, Fi- giovanni assured Michelangelo that Bernardino wished to carry it out to perfection (che vole dare la perfectione al pergamo). Figio- vanni further mentioned that two wallers (maestri muratori), six manual laborers (manovali) and two scarpellini were working on the project, and another six maestri scarpellini were carving the door in the upper cloister that serves as the entrance to a

83 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, pp. 385, 436-438. 14 For this commission, see W. WALLACE, 'Michelangelo's Project for a

Reliquary Tribune in San Lorenzo", Architectura: Zeitschrift fur- Geschichte der Baukunst, XII, 1987, pp. 45-57.

85 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, p. 430.

271



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

staircase and corridor which lead to the balcony (Fig. 12).' This door, unjustly attributed to Giovanni Antonio Dosio by Rudolf Wittkower and dated much later, is clearly identified by Figiovanni as the handywork of the scarpellini working under Bernardino's direction in 1532.' Its similarity to the pedimented tabernacles in the library vestibule (Fig. 8) is thereby explained; it was carved under the auspices of the same capomaestro and probably by some of the same scarpellini.

The incidental notices in Figiovanni's letters refer to at least sixteen persons working on the Reliquary Tribune under Bernar- dino's direction, yet his role in this commission was more than merely supervisory. It included interpreting Michelangelo's im- precise intentions as they were recorded in the still extant ground- plan of the balcony, probably made before Michelangelo departed for Rome (Fig. 13).' In fact, the final project differs markedly from Michelangelo's sketch, most notably in the size of the central storage room and the location of the supporting columns relative to the balcony doors. In October, Bernardino sent his own mea- sured drawing of the partially completed project to Michelangelo asking him to clarify certain aspects of the design.89 Thus, while Michelangelo's drawn plan provided a general guideline for his

86 Ibid., III, pp. 440, 430. 87 The door was attributed to Dosio by Rudolf Wittkower (followed by

Wachler and Ackerman) on the basis of Dosio's drawing for it in the Uffizi (no. 1946A; see R. WITTKOWER, "Michelangelo's Biblioteca Laurenziana", Art Bulletin, XVI, 1934, pp. 203-204, Figs. 62, 63, and the more recent discussion by L. WACHLER, "Giovannantonio Dosio: ein Architekt des spaten Cinquecento", Romisches Jahrbuch fur Kunstgeschichte, XVI, 1976, pp. 160-161). It is certain, however, that Figiovanni is referring to this door in his letter to Michelangelo of 23 November 1532 ("la porta per salire alle reliquie", Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 440). Therefore, it is no longer possible to credit Dosio with the design or the execution of this door since it was already underway in 1532 and Dosio was not born until the following year.

"I Oxford, Ashmolean Museum (Parker no. 311), 155 x 270 mm; see L. DUSSLER, Die Zeichnungen des Michelangelo: Kritischer Katalog, Berlin, 1959, no. 199.

89 Bernardino's drawing is no longer extant, but is clearly mentioned in the letter sent to Michelangelo: "Di mano di Bernardo capo maestro nostro si manda la pianta di in sul pavimento del pergamo, la quale e presa in sul murato et e misurata a punto da lui" (Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], III, p. 437). The letter is actually in Figiovanni's hand, although there is a first person reference to Bernardino.

272




capomaestro, it is evident that many details of design, and particularly the decoration, were left in Bernardino's hands. For example, he probably appointed the scarpellini who carved the two enframing pilasters in dark grey macigno (Fig. 14). The pilasters are decorated with thick garlands of fruits and nuts suspended from Medici devices. They were carved by two craftsmen as they display subtle differences in style and technique, and more obvious differences of composition. They are perfect examples of the quality of workmanship produced by unnamed assistants working for Mi- chelangelo, even in the master's absence. Indeed, the reliquary balcony earned Michelangelo's admiring praise when he returned to Florence in mid-1533 and saw the completed project for the first time.90

During the early 1530s, Bernardino was also employed as a scarpellino and estimator (stimatore) for interior work in the Strozzi palace.91 In fact, Bernardino's supervision of the Reliquary Tribune balcony marks the end of his certainly documented artistic collaboration with Michelangelo, although it appears he may have followed the master to Rome sometime before 1540. In that year, "Bernardino de la Croce", identifying Bernardino by his Florentine property at Porta alla Croce, was paid a large sum (600 gold scudi) from the papal camera.92 The nature of his work is unspecified unless he is once again working in partnership and identifiable as the "Bernardo Florentino et socijs scarpellinis", documented carving capitals in St. Peter's in the same year.93

It is certain that Bernardino was in Florence in 1545 when

90 On returning to Florence and seeing the completed balcony, Michelangelo judged it to be a "bella cossa" which also greatly pleased the pope (as reported in a letter from Sebastiano del Piombo, Carteggio, cit. [see note 1], IV, p. 22: "Del pergamo ancora li piace assai che sia riuscita bella cossa").

91 ASF: Carte Strozziane, ser. 5, 104: Libro di Muraglia del Palazzo di Firenze di Lorenzo e Filippo di Filippo Strozzi, Debitori e Creditori, Ricordanze, segn. A, 1533-1548, passim. I would like to thank Michael Lingohr for this reference.

92 K. FREY, "Studien zu Michelagniolo Buonarroti und zur Kunst seiner Zeit", Jahrbuch der kdniglich preussischen Kunstsammlungen, XXX, Beiheft, 1909, p. 143, n. 69. The reference to him as "messer Bernardino de la Croce" recalls the manner in which he is identified in his Decima declarations and in his agreement with the monks of San Miniato (see note 97).

93 K. FREY, "Zur Baugeschichte des St. Peter", Jahrbuch der koniglich preussischen Kunstsammlungen, XXXIII, Beiheft, 1913, pp. 46-47, notes 22, 25.

273



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

he was mentioned in a letter from Michelangelo to his father.' It is the last notice of Bernardino's relationship with the Buonar- roti and it echoes a sentiment expressed at other times during their long and occasionally rocky association: "Don't trust Bernardino: pretend to have faith in him but don't believe a word he says because he is a great scoundrel".'

Michelangelo's comment seems particularly vicious out of context, but it should be read as another instance of his recurrent admonitions to various family members to exercise extreme caution when purchasing property. Nonetheless, it appears that, in Mi- chelangelo's eyes, Bernardino ultimately proved unreliable. Per- haps he had abandoned the work at St. Peter's, something Miche- langelo never felt free to do. Bernardino's home, his small family, and his advanced age (he was seventy in 1545) might have per- suaded him to return to Florence where he died six years later, in March 1551.'

Sometime before 1520 Bernardino purchased a fair-size farm property (16 staiora) with a worker's house (casa oggi dal lavoratore) located near Florence at a place called Arcipressi just outside the Porta alla Croce (today Piazza Beccaria).9 In 1533, he bequeathed to his son Sandro one-third share of another house "con terra lavoratia" at a place called "Richonicha" which he had received as part of the dowry from his wife, Lisa.' Sandro himself acquired two additional pieces of property in Settignano - at

94 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), IV, p. 221. 95 Ibid., IV, p. 221. "Ma non ti fidare di Bernardo Basso: mostra di

prestargli fede, ma non gli creder niente, perche e un gran fellone". 96 ASF: Arte de' Medici e Speziali 251, Libro dei Morti 1544-1560, fol.

21r. His death is registered in the parish of Sant'Ambrogio, the same as his farm property at Porta alla Croce.

97 ASF: Dec. Rep. 242 (S. Giovanni 1520), fol. 5r. He actually held a long-term lease on the property, as he states in his declaration: "...compero overo condusse al linea dall'opera di S. Giovanni di Firenze". Although the entry appears to have been written in 1533, it was entered into the Decima volume of 1520. He certainly owned property at Porta alla Croce by 1524 since he is described as "Bernardino di Piero di Bernardo da la porta alla croce" in his agreement of that year to provide stone for the campanile of San Miniato, (ASF: Conv. Sopp. CLXVIII, S. Miniato 169, fol. 17v).

98 ASF: Dec. Rep. 245 (S. Giovanni 1520), fols. 387r and 388r.

274




alla Piazza and at Poggio - thanks to having married Gherardo di Michele's daughter.' Thus, by the early 1530s, the Bassi had become modestly prosperous landholders. The gradual improve- ment of their economic circumstances over the course of more than fifty years is partly due to the family's long service to the Buonarroti, as well as to a judicious marriage, which itself belongs to the web of relationships which bind together Michelangelo's assistants.

Similarly, Bernardino's professional development and success - from unskilled son of a tenant farmer to responsible capomaestro - are surely related to his nearly lifelong relationship with Michelangelo and the opportunities which this collaboration of- fered. In 1504 his father was a "lavoratore di tere" on rented property without "sustanza"; in the 1530s, Bernardino was an experienced overseer and property owner and, in Michelangelo's words, "capo maestro qua dell'opera di San Lorenzo"." That Michelangelo relied on Bernardino for more than twenty years, and gave him increasing responsibility for supervising his commissions, are sure measures of his confidence in his assistant. Growing up as part of the Buonarroti "famiglia" certainly had much to do with Michelangelo's willingness to entrust important tasks to Bernardino; however, it is equally obvious that Bernar- dino must have been both capable and professionally responsible... whatever Michelangelo, his father, and Bernardino's father may have said about him in anger.

99 ASF: Dec. Rep. 245 (S. Giovanni 1520), fol. 387r. In the Decima of 1536, Sandro declared a house in Settignano and two properties at "alla piazza" together "di staiora 11 incircha" as well as one third share of a house and a small plot "di terra lavoratia e vite e ulivi" in "arochhani" [sic] (ASF: Dec. Gran. 5341, fol. 395v; see also fols. 333v and 334v).

100 Carteggio, cit. (see note 1), III, p. 385 and according to the canon of San Lorenzo, Giovanbattista Figiovanni, "capo maestro nostro" (ibid., p. 437). The relationship between the Bassi and Buonarroti is an example, on a microscopic level, of the larger picture of Florentine society drawn by Dale and F. W. Kent in which there "existed ties of clientage, dependence and affection which could cut, vertically if not always cleanly, across class loyalties and down into the social structure..." (KENT and KENT, Ic. cit. [see note 7], pp. 250, 258 with references to the current debate regarding the structure of Florentine society which they characterize as "a fluid structure [or structures] of formidable in- tricacy and complexit").

275



WILLIAM E. WALLACE

Because of their long and intricate relations with the Buo- narroti, we know more about the Bassi than many of the more than two hundred assistants who worked for Michelangelo at San Lorenzo. While Michelangelo's relationship with Bernardino was singular it was not unique, and it serves to illuminate some general characteristics of the work force that Michelangelo employed at San Lorenzo.

Bernardino, for example, typifies the diversity of employment that was common among Michelangelo's assistants. Bargiaca, it will be recalled, first stuccoed the vault in the New Sacristy, then worked in marble, and finally assisted Bernardino in supplying macigno for the Laurentian Library. Similarly Topolino first quarried marble and then assisted Michelangelo blocking out figures in Florence before becoming a supervisor in the marble quarries at Carrara. His neighbor, Francesco del Lucchesino, not only quarried and delivered macigno for the New Sacristy but he also worked in marble; then, in 1533, he contracted to provide the stone and to carve the stairway for the Laurentian Library. Stefano di Tommaso worked on the macigno membering in the New Sa- cristy, erected the marble lantern that surmounts the building, assisted Michelangelo with the fortifications during the Last Re- public, ran errands and kept some of his master's accounts, and occasionally he even made drawings for him.10'

Most of Michelangelo's assistants were trained professionals, skilled and experienced craftsmen hired to do one or more jobs rather than young garzoni apprenticed to learn a trade. Most were from Settignano and Fiesole, and, like Bernardino, a large number were long-time aquaintances of Michelangelo, his family, or his colleagues long before they became his employees. Indeed, Michelangelo's assistants are knit together by innumerable family and professional ties, as well as through marriage, friendship, and neighborhood. There are, for example, more than one hundred persons for whom kinship ties can be established or reasonably po-

101 The examples cited are part of my larger study of Michelangelo's assistants, aspects of which I have examined in various articles cited herein, as well as in a study of architectural drawings made by assistants for Michelangelo in W. WALLACE, "Two Presentation Drawings for Michelangelo's Medici Chapel", Master Drawings, XXV, 1987, pp. 242-260. The figures given in the following paragraph, therefore, are well grounded but must be considered preliminary.

276




sited, including four members of the Ferrucci family, seven Cioli, eight Fancelli, and five members of the Lucchesini from three suc- cessive generations. There are at least a dozen fathers and sons who worked for Michelangelo and more than a dozen sets of brothers, as well as many "compagni", a form of professional partnership." At least three persons working in the Laurentian Library vestibule lived on either side of the Buonarroti farm in Settignano, and many more lived in the immediate neighborhood. In addition, there were various friends of the family that Michelangelo's father recommended to him, a son-in-law and friend that Topolino encouraged him to hire, as well as those persons, like Andrea San- sovino and a certain "Mantovano intagliatore", who willingly of- fered their services to Michelangelo. Many more of these direct and indirect relationships surely exist but the use of first names and nicknames make many identifications tenuous. Yet it is probably true that few persons working at San Lorenzo were not known or related in some fashion to another one of the assistants working there.

Bernardino Basso is merely one example: further to map the relationships is to enter into the intricacies of the Italian extended family, where, as is still true today, family and job, home and workplace, friends and professional relations are closely entwined. Exalted genius that he was, Michelangelo was deeply enmeshed in this world, and in some measure, dependent on it. It was a means by which Michelangelo exercised a degree of quality control and ensured himself a fairly steady work force since, as Richard Gold- thwaite reminds us, Renaissance labor was notoriously unreliable, especially in the building trades.

The recognition of the part played by Michelangelo's assistants in his commissions in no sense diminishes the artist, nor are the final products any less his. It is a further credit to the artist's genius that he could effectively utilize the talents of others to create works of art that everywhere reveal his unique stamp, conceptually and stylistically.

102 On the term, see H. CAPLOW, 'Sculptor's Partnership in Michelozzo's Florence", Studies in the Renaissance, XXI, 1974, pp. 145-175, and S. CONNELL, The Employment of Sculptors and Stonemasons in Venice in the Fifteenth Century, (Garland) New York-London, 1988, esp. pp. 36-53.

277



Michelangelo at Work: Bernardino Basso, Friend, Scoundrel, and Capomaestro

Documents

Transcript of Michelangelo at Work: Bernardino Basso, Friend, Scoundrel, and Capomaestro