Page:The Building News and Engineering Journal, Volume 22, 1872.djvu/153

 Fes. 16, 1872. THE BUILDING NEWS. 137 CRITICAL NOTES ON GREAT ITALIAN ARCHITECTS.—VI. By J. B. Warina. A. MEMBER of our profession stated lately at the Institute that he was elected honorary member of a Society at Genoa, with the title of ‘‘ Engineer and Architect.” This he appeared to consider odd, and unfor- tunately, to English ears, so it may sound, for the divorce between engineering and architecture is complete in this country, to the great detriment of each science. We have seen in the lives of the greatest architects of the Renaissance, that some of the most distinguished were educated as _ gold- smiths and sculptors, and yet executed important engineering works. We_ shall notice in a future paper others of equal fame who were celebrated as painters, and in the present article we propose to give some ac- count of the greatest of his class, who, besides being an architect, was a military engineer of the highest order. Fra Giocondo and Mi- chele San Michele, the two great Lombard masters, were both distinguished engineers : of the former we propose to speak anon. At present we shall confine our remarks to MICHELE SAN MICHELE, who was born at Verona in 1484, and was edu- cated as an architect by his father Giovanni, and his uncle Bartolommeo, whom Vasari describes as ‘‘excellent architects.” At sixteen years of age, according to our author, he went to Rome, and assiduously studied the ancient remains there ; and was held in such repute for his ability, that he was invited to Orvieto, and made Superintendent of Works at the Cathedral when he must have been quite a youth. Whilst at Orvieto he was also made Superintendent of Works at the neighbouring town of Montefiascone. In both places he was engaged not only on the Cathedrals, but on private works. He must have remained in Rome and its neighbourhood for several years, for we next find him engaged by Pope Clement VII. (Giulio di Medici), who was raised to the Pontificate in 1523. When San Michele was about thirty-nine years of age, he, together with Antonio San Gallo, went to inspect the fortifications of the Papal States, and construct fresh ones where required. Haying performed this service to the satisfac- tion of the Pontiff, he determined to return to Verona, and shortly set out on a tour of inspection of the principal Venetian fortified towns. He was seized by order of the Sig- noria of Venice—who had been informed of his proceedings—and was imprisoned and ex- amined as to his object. The result was that the Signoria were satisfied he was ‘‘a man of probity, and not only set him instantly at liberty, but even invited him to enter their service, with the promise of a handsome sti- pend.” ‘This offer San Michele, being still under engagement to the Pope, declined, but eventually he did enter the service of the Republic, and was immediately employed in the fortifications of his native city, and erected in 1527 the Maddalena, a ‘‘ very hand- some fort,” ‘ with the first angular bastion ever constructed.” After repairing old, and constructing several new, fortified works in the territory of the Republic, San Michele was permitted by the Signoria, at the earnest request of Francisco Sforza, to inspect the fortresses of the Milanese, but only for the space of three months. On his return he made a full report to the Signoria of all their principal fortified towns of the Republic in Italy, and was then des- patched by them to restore and fortify Zara and the principal cities of Dalmatia, in which he was assisted by his nephew Giovan’ Giro- lamo San Michele, whom he left in charge of the numerous works then pressed on by the Republic, whilst he himself proceeded to per- form similar services for the islands of Corfu, Cyprus, and Candia (Crete), the fortifications of Canea, Rettimo, and Candia (Khandax: Arabic— greatfortress”), the last of which, at a later period, resisted the great siege by the Turks for more than twenty years, but finally surrendered in 1669. This was, perhaps, the most memorable siege on record, and one which bore full testimony to San Michele’s genius as a military engineer, the largest cannon then known to the world having been brought to bear against the place by the Turks.* Gioyan’ Girolamo San Michele being thus left in charge of the Istrian and Dalmatian for- tresses, his uncle Michele returned to Venice, and commenced the construction of the great fort of San Andrea, at the north-east entrance of the Lido, a work in every way remarkable, for the difficulty of obtaining proper founda- tions, for its exposed position, for its admir- able design, and its fine architecture. Of this important fort, Vasari tells us that San Michele ‘‘ prepared a very beautiful and most exact model of the whole work,” and gives a graphic account of the apparently insuperable difficulties attendant on laying the foundations of the construction, and of the courage, per- severance, and ingenuity displayed by San Michele in overcoming them. But, even when built, the popular opinion was so strongly expressed that it could never stand the shock of the heavy ordnance with which the architect proposed to furnish it, that the Signoria put it to a crucial test by a synchro- nous fire of all the heaviest artillery the arsenal could furnish, from its forty embra- sures, out of which the fort came firm and unshaken, so that the most timid or envious were silenced in their forebodings of evil. We may here point out that when the founda- tions were at last laid, San Michele suffered them to remain during a sufficient space of time for the purpose of settling, before he began to build the superimposed fortifications, with their enclosed Piazza and other build- ings—a precaution which should always be taken in submarine works. Vasari particu- larly praises the fine masonry of the building, and adds, ‘‘ Not only is this fortress astonish- ing from the site on which it has been erected, but it is, besides, admirable for its extraordi- nary beauty, to say nothing of its incalculable cost, in respect to which it is among the most remarkable in Europe.” It is certainly a triumph of the military engineer’s art, and is justly esteemed by Quatremére de Quincy as “the most remarkable monument of San Michele’s science.” And it is not without cause that San Michele has been often re- garded as the originator of the system of for- tification in vogue up to late days, although his ideas have naturally received much deve- lopment by Vauban, Cohorn, and others. Nextin order we proceed to notice the gates of Verona, as being works of a semi-fortified character, of which the finest are the Porta Nuova, Porta S$. Zeno, and Porta Stuppa or del Pallio. The last named may be taken as the noblest and most characteristic of the series, and Gwilt very well observes, that ‘in this gate, the way in which San Michele com- bined pure and beautiful architecture with the requisites called in for fortification may be seen displayed to great advan- tage. It is an instance of his wonderful ingenuity and taste.” The Porta Nuova is inscribed with the date 1533. That ‘ del Pallio” was not completed at the time of San Michele’s death, which took place at Verona in the year 1559, according to Vasari, who also states that the ‘‘two very beautiful gates of Legnano” were designed by him. The gate of S. Michael at Parma is also ascribed to him. It was built by Pope Paul II., and is dated 1545. The bridge at Verona called ‘ Ponte Nuova.” The cistern of the five wells at Zara is possibly from his design, or that of his nephew, as well as the fine gates, the ‘* Porta di Terra Firma” at the same place, dated 1533, and that of San Nicolo. tillery of the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth Cen- turies, see a Paper by General Lefroy, in the Archeo- logical Journal, December, 1868. The Lazaretto of Verona, only partially carried out, a large arcaded building with central chapel. Besides these important works, San Michele designed several churches, and some of the noblest palaces of Verona and Venice. In- deed, Verona is almost as much the City of San Micheli as Vicenza is that of Palladio : their genius is strikingly displayed in the monuments of each. Such are the chapel of the Guareschi in the church of San Bernardino, Verona. This chapel, circular on plan, now called the Pellegrini Chapel, is generally considered San Michele’s masterpiece of its class. It is of the Corinthian order, constructed of a very beautiful whitish stone, and is truly a most beautiful work, both in design and de- tail, although, from being unfinished at the time of San Michele’s death, some faults— probably not of the master, but of his suc- cessor—are to be found in it. The whole was restored, and finally completed by the architect Giuliani in 1793, who published a finely-illustrated work upon it. The Madonna di Campagna, near Verona, was originally designed by San Michele ; but not commenced till the year of his death, and was carried out under the direction of his nephew, Bernardino Brugnoli, who appears to have been for a long time San Michele’s principal assistant at Verona. The unfinished facade of S. M. in Organo; the cloisters of S. Eufemia, and part of the facade of S. Tommaso Cantuariense ; the cupola and campanile of San Georgio Maggiore (the last-named continued by Ber- nardino); the campanile and portions of the interior of the Duomo, Verona, and the con- vent of the nuns of San Biagio Catoldo, at Venice, were also by him. The facade of San Sebastian, Verona, is also attributed to him, and the octagonal chapel of the della Torre family at their villa of Fumane. In his palatial designs the artistic genius of San Michele is not less admirably displayed. The palaces of Verona built by him rival those of Venice and of Vicenza, and, we would even venture to say, surpass those of Palladio. Such are the fine palaces Canossa, Guasta Verza, Bevilacqua, Pel- legrini, and Pompei della Vittoria (olim Lazziuoli), and the portals of the Preffetura and Podesta in Verona; and, in Venice: the palaces _Grimani, Mocenigo (olim Cornaro), Spinelli (olim Cornaro), and Bragadini, and the great palace of Soranza, near Castelfranco, now destroyed; but which was one of San Michele’s masterpieces—plain and massive—and many other private buildings and works of less note, such as the gateways of the Casa Uberti and Casa Buturini at Verona, the Palazzo Roncali at Rovigo, and the depository for the Bucentaur at Venice. Besides these various works, San Mi- chele designed the magnificent monument erected in San Antonio Padua to the Doge A. Contarini (A.D. 1555) the sculpture being by Allessandro Vittoriaand Danese Cattaneo ; that of Cardinal Bembo in the same church, and the tomb of Luigi Visconti (1553) in the adjoining cloisters. The tomb of Count della Torre in San Francesco, Verona, is also attributed to him, and the monuments to Tommaso da Vico in S. Zenone, and Tommaso Lavagnoli in §. Eufemia, in the same city. In considering the artistic merit of San Michele as an architect, it should be borne in mind that he formed a style peculiarly his own. It was true that he was not only a member of afamily of architects, and received all the advantages of an early and regular edu- cation, as well as the examples of such great masters as Bramante, Michael Angelo, and the San Galli, during his residence at Rome ; nevertheless, his manner is distinctly original: strength, boldness, effect, and beauty are its marked characteristics. His arrangement of boldly-rusticated base- ments, combined with a large use of the arch and engaged column, is of noble effect; and his designs appear, to us at least, superior not
 * For an interesting account of the great Turkish ar-