|
The Alchemical Spirit of G.B. Piranesi in Diverse maniere d’adornare i cammini
University of Pennsylvania Gold and Silver
“What can be more wonderful than some of the works of Balthasarre of Sienna, particularly in the Palace of Massimi built by him? But whoever shall attentively examine his conduct with regard to the internal ornaments of that palace, will certainly agree with me, that he has broken the thread, .... the same may be said of Pirro Ligorio; let the small house situated at the Belvedere be examined, many beautiful endeavours will be seen in imitation of the ancients, ... but if the whole be considered; oh heavens! Gold and silver are confounded with lead, and other baser materials.“[1] While Balthasarre of Sienna and Pirro Ligorio were praised for being highly accomplished in the execution of buildings, in what concerned the ornamentation of their interiors, Piranesi found them lacking and the language he used is most illustrative: “... but if the whole be considered; oh heavens! Gold and silver are confounded with lead, and other baser materials.” In so stating, Piranesi revealed not only his knowledge of the metallurgical hierarchies at the origins of all alchemical processes, but in having associated the act of interior ornamentation with that of alchemical transmutations, correlated the attainment of excellence in decorative matters decorative with the age-old pursuit of gold. The skill required of the architect in assuring a proper correspondence between the interior and the exterior of a building was tantamount to that required by the alchemist in material metamorphoses.
But in continuing to unveil Piranesi’s predilection for mercurial ornaments,
it is important to note the invaluable scholarship undertaken by Maurizio Calvesi
in this regard. Few have ventured to propose correspondences between Piranesi’s
etchings and branches of esoteric philosophy, yet Calvesi has done just this;
his primary focus being the series of etchings entitled Capricci/Grotteschi
(1744-47).[5] In
a careful study of their iconography, Calvesi mapped a detailed structure of
resemblances between Piranesi’s four Capricci and the four fold structure
of the alchemical process: his thesis, each Capriccio represented one
of the principal stages in the transmutation of metals.[6]
Entitled, The Skeletons, The Triumphal Arch, The Tomb of Nero, and The Monumental
Tablet, Piranesi’s etchings portray the earth-bound stages of the nigredo,
the water-filled stage of leucosi, the airy stage of xantosi, and
the fiery stage of rubedo, respectively. As such, each etching depicts
an iconography reflective of the wider four fold structure of the world; each
depicts one of the four elements, seasons, times of day, and bodily humours.
In one example, Calvesi describes the final Capriccio as such, Calvesi’s insightful interpretations are no doubt worthy of further study, however, Piranesi’s awareness of the Hermetic tradition can also be authenticated in a number of additional ways. Relying solely on the iconographic identification of individual figures may prove insufficient. As such, this essay aspires to develop a wider understanding of the alchemical language at the center of Piranesi’s ornamental language by demonstrating the manner in which Diverse maniere d’adornare i cammini (1769) devised explicit coincidences between the Hermetic art of transmutations and the decorative art of interiors. Diverse maniere Piranesi was clearly an accomplished etcher; his countless picturesque vistas were widely circulated throughout Europe and adorned the home of many an enlightened connoisseur. And yet, Piranesi was more than a mere vedutista. By mid - century, he had initiated projects vastly different from his earlier scenographic depictions. Between the years 1761 and 1769, Piranesi ventured into the realms of architectural theory radically transforming the content of his oeuvre. His aim was no less than the public dismissal of contemporary architects and critics alike: his most strident criticism reserved for those whose scholarship challenged his antiquarian findings, particularly those who predicated a return to antiquity via the imitation of a culture other than his own. To this end, Piranesi published three controversial texts; Della magnificenza ed architettura dei Romani (1761), Parere su l’architettura, Dialogo (1765) and Diverse maniere d’adornare i cammini (1769). In Della magnificenza , Piranesi authored 200 pages, etched 30 drawing plates and advanced the origins of Roman culture in ancient Etruria. He celebrated its arts and sciences and claimed Rome’s supremacy in matters political, spiritual and artistic, the result of this progeny. In his second work, the Parere su l’architettura, Piranesi once again valorized Roman architecture. This time, however, he championed the excellence of its copious ornamental figures; his greater goal being the promotion of architectural invention and the use of decorative languages in contemporary architecture. But it was his third and final work, Diverse maniere, which articulated an entirely new language of ornamentation; a language in which figural excess and architectural eclecticism gave rise to a series of decorative schemas here thereto never before published in the 18th century. Its originality was legible in both visual and textual terms. Piranesi etched hundreds of different design proposals and published its accompanying text, The Apologetical Essay in Defense of the Egyptian and Tuscan Architecture, in three different languages - Italian, French and English. Most critical for this essay, however, Diverse maniere promoted a concept of architectural theory which positioned the beginnings of art within a frame of reference beyond that of a reasoned Enlightenment: it set the origins of figuration within the rather more obscure world of Hermetic beliefs. Using both text and image, Piranesi invented a narrative of architectural origins which connected the invention of ornaments -- as used in painting, sculpture and architecture -- to the practice of alchemy. To this end, he subscribed to a number of its topics, including; the sacredness of natural elements and the veneration of Egypt. The natural element which Piranesi chose to highlight was that of fire, as the treatise is clearly focused on the explication of the modern decorative fireplace. And his return to Egypt, the original font of ancient wisdom, was a significant contribution to the subsequent promotion of a neo-Egyptian style in the late 18th century. For Piranesi, both of these topics were rhetorical devices of great importance: the remainder of this essay unfolds the manner in which this was so. The Sacred Fire Throughout Diverse maniere, the interior space favoured by Piranesi was that of the Cabinet; the quintessential space of both retreat and appearance for gentlemen of the 18th century. Following French advancements in the design of the Apartement, domestic environments developed a hierarchical distribution of rooms which choreographed the home’s various levels of public and private interactions. The male gendered space of the Cabinet, wherein business and intellectual exchanges were conducted, was one such room. Piranesi chose to highlight this environment for a number of reasons. During the 18th century, the Cabinet played a significant
role in the portrayal of “Among the numerous ruins of ancient buildings which I have seen, and examined in Rome, and throughout all Latium.....I have not only not found any chimney in the manner of ours, but not even the smallest hint in favour of this opinion.”[10]
As cited by Calvesi and depicted by Piranesi in his Capriccio - The Monumental Tablet, fire defined the fourth and final stage in the alchemical process of transmutation. Calvesi described the etching as such: “The element of fire is clearly visible in the foreground: from the large flame which grows out of the brazier, and rises toward the right-hand side of the composition, a strange body takes shape, a phantom like form, a type of winged bull whose body is lost amongst the smoke and the flames, as if emerging from them. The conclusion of the Alchemical process is the transubstantiation of the spirit.”[11] Piranesi’s winged bull was representative of precisely such a spirit. As in this etching, so too in Diverse maniere, Piranesi’s representation of fire was indicative of more than mere material burning. His depiction of both the animated fire and its accompanying ornaments advanced the fireplace as an architectural element of near sacred importance: its iconography analogous to that of the sacred flame of Alchemy. In The Forge and the Crucible, The origins and structures of Alchemy, Mircea Eliade reminds us of the power of this sacred flame, “The alchemist, like the smith, and like the potter before him, is a “master of fire”. It is with the fire that he controls the passage of matter from one state to another. The first potter who, with the aid of live embers, was successful in hardening those shapes which he had given to his clay, must have felt the intoxication of the demiurge: he had discovered a transmuting agent. That which natural heat -- from the sun or from the bowels of the earth -- took so long to ripen, was transformed by fire at a speed hitherto undreamed of. ...It was therefore the manifestation of a magico-religious power which could modify the world and which consequently, did not belong to this world. That is why the most primitive cultures look upon the specialist in the sacred - the shaman, the medicine- man, the magician as a “master of fire.”[12] In privileging the ornamental fireplace, Piranesi had affected in architectural terms a metaphorical return to the sacred fire of Alchemy, aspiring to associate the transformative power of the alchemical kiln with the transformative power of the gentleman’s Cabinet. In so doing, Piranesi encapsulated the actions of a demiurge whose mastery over the representation of fire endeavored to ensure the moral and intellectual transformation of his patrons. The Neo- Egyptian Style
His fascination for Egypt was unequivocal. He invariably studied the Egyptian buildings and artifacts published by the likes of Fischer von Erlach, Bernard de Montfaucon and Anthanasius Kircher: scholars who in the 17th and 18th century made known their Egyptian findings. Kircher had published three major works to this effect; Lingua Aegyptiaca Restituta of 1643, Oedipus Aegyptiacus of 1652, and Sphinx Mystagoga of 1676. The wealth of ornaments, hieroglyphs and symbols portrayed within, albeit at times unfounded, initiated a near-cult of Egyptian iconography. Kircher’s power amongst antiquarians was confirmed with the appearance of the Museo Kircheriano - a center of Jesuit learning which sought the study of ancient cultures, religions and esoteric philosophies.[13] But in the end, Piranesi also had first hand access to Egypt via the fragments physically available throughout the city of Rome. Obelisks abound in Piazzas Navona, del Popolo, S. Pietro and della Minerva and Hadrian’s Villa was no less plentiful in Egyptian sculpture. To any one interested in mining the ancient association between Egypt and Rome, both text and landscape afforded the scholar a wealth of sources. Piranesi’s own valorization of this ancient civilization sought a specific effect: to integrate the indisputable treasures of Egypt past with the potential marvels of 18th century Rome. To this end, in the first half of The Apologetical Essay in Defense of the Egyptian and Tuscan Architecture, Piranesi devised a complex theory of artifice to justify his contemporary promotion of Egyptian figuration. He championed the “majesty and gravity which characterises the architecture of the Egyptians,“[14] and remarked on the exceptional variety of its ornamental language. The nation’s genius had fashioned stone figures in the form of abstract plants, sphinxes, serpents, winged creatures, and enigmatic hybrids partly human and partly feline. He endeavoured to dispel the mounting criticism of those who judged Egyptian ornaments coarse, disproportionate, and unnatural and asked his peers to ponder “...is the character of the Egyptian works so hard as it is generally thought to be?”[15] His response necessitated the invention of an historical postulate: the Egyptians had developed two forms of ornamentation, one mimetic of Nature, the other free of its proportional constraints. “The ancients, as well as the moderns, made statues, and images of all that is to be seen in nature, some to be considered in themselves, and others for the embellishment of architecture....: in the first they were exact in imitating nature, and in giving to each the proportions and graces which were proper to them; not so in regard to the second; these were to be subjected to the laws of architecture, and to receive such modifications as it requires.”[16]
“It would be a long undertaking to describe all the anonymous monsters, which
are to be met with in the ancient works of architecture. Besides griffins, centaurs,
Hippogryphs, Syrens, chimeras, and other similar productions of a poetic imagination,
there are an infinity of others no less capricious and extravagant, which owe
their being to the necessity in which the artists find themselves of adapting
the ornaments to the gravity of the architecture.”[17]
Piranesi’s designs à la Egyptienne and his textual defense of its figuration were significant for the Egyptian revival of the 18th century. While many architects, artists, and theorists contributed to its popularization, no other individual had used its vocabulary to invent an entirely new language of ornamentation. His contribution spurred the burgeoning revival, for while interest was registered as early as the mid 17th century, by late 18th French, Italian and English architects sought no less than a comprehensive application of Egyptian figuration. Hubert Robert, le Comte de Caylus, and Anton Raphael Mengs are only a few of those who endeavored to make manifest their mounting interest in Egypt, the latter having furnished the Villa Albani and the Vatican with a room à la Egyptienne.[19] Such attempts to decipher the origins of this infatuation
must, however, acknowledge the significant role played by Freemasonic practices
in the development of Egyptian figuration. During the late 18th century,
many an artist subscribed to the rites and mysteries of this Hermetic brotherhood.
Music, no less than painting and architecture, derived much of its artistic
direction from Freemasonic constructs. And like, Mozart, Casanova, Cagliostro,
and Andrea Memmo, Piranesi was an active participant of such fraternities, having
himself been made a Cavaliere of the Knights of Malta. Not surprisingly, a host of symbols privileged by Piranesi, originated within the repertoire of Masonic iconography. What is most instructive, however, is that Piranesi’s participation contributed to the invention of architecture’s first neo - Egyptian Style. For in so doing, Piranesi had once again conceived an architectural return to the original font of Alchemy - ancient Egypt. In the end Piranesi’s portrayal of fire and his metaphorical return to Egypt were theoretical topics which harbored the alchemical spirit. On the eve of modernity, Piranesi adopted their iconography, emblems and symbols in the pursuit of an ornamental language of coincidences. He championed the Hermetic tradition for it constituted a sacred realm of figuration - one which enabled the architect to project a language of ornamentation in a world increasingly profane. That history has revealed our own inability to harmoniously coexist with the ornament is significant. The debate still rages as to the necessary role which ornaments play in the narrative function of architecture; another return to the transcendental font of Alchemical traditions may yet be required to settle it. [1]. See p. 3 of Diverse maniere d’adornare i cammini ed ogni parte degli Edifizi desunte dall’Architettura Egizia, Etrusca, e Greca con un Ragionamento Apologetico in difesa dell’Architettura Egizia E Toscana, Opera del Calvaliere Giambattista Piranesi Architetto, Roma MDCCLXIX, as published in Wilton- Ely, John. The Polemical Works, Edited and Introduced by Wilton-Ely, Gregg International Publishers Limited: England, 1972. [2]. All images are cited from Ficacci, Luigi. Piranesi, The Complete Etchings. Taschen, 2000. p. 508 and p. 525. [3]. Ibid., p. 529. [4]. Ibid., p. 515. [5]. Ibid., p. 124 and 125. [6]. Focillion, Henri. Giovanni Baptisia Piranesi, a cura di Maurizio Calvesi e Augusta Monferini. Edizioni Alfa Bologna, 1963. Introduction by Maurizio Calvesi. [7]. Ibid., p. 27. Translation by F. Trubiano. [8]. Ibid., Translation by F. Trubiano [9]. Ficacci, Luigi. Piranesi, The Complete Etchings. p. 516 and 521. [10]. Wilton- Ely, John. The Polemical Works. p. 1 and 2. [11]. Focillion, Henri. Giovanni Baptisia Piranesi, a cura di Maurizio Calvesi e Augusta Monferini, p. XXVIII. Translation by F. Trubiano. [12]. Eliade, Mircea. The Forge and the Crucible - The Origins and Structures of Alchemy. Harper Torch Books: New York, 1962. p. 79. [13]. Rykwert, Joseph. The First Moderns. MIT Press: London, 1991. p. 67. [14]. Wilton- Ely, John. The Polemical Works. p. 13. [15]. Ibid., p. 10. [16]. Ibid., p. 11. [17]. Ibid., p. 12. [18]. Curl, James Stevens. The Egyptian Revival. George Allen & Unwin: London, 1982. p. 79. [19]. Rykwert, Joseph. The First Moderns. p, 346. |
Diverse maniere d’adornare i cammini (1769),
was Giambattista Piranesi’s architectural treatise on the decorative arts (see
fig. 1). It valorized what Piranesi termed la piccola architettura:
the architecture of interior surfaces and ornamental furnishings. All too
often, Piranesi believed, the relationship between the large and the small in
architectural matters had been misunderstood by his fellow architects. As such,
a treatise on the decorative arts was required. In the opening pages of Diverse
maniere, Piranesi penned a paragraph in defense of his project:
Piranesi was well familiar with the alchemist’s transformational operations, as his choice
of ornamental figures attests. Throughout his career, alchemical symbols and
mercurial emblems were an inexhaustible font for the creative development of
his visual imagination. Numerous are the etchings in which the image of Hermes
and his Caduceus are portrayed; the Composition of Antique Fragments from
Osservazioni sopra la lettre de M. Mariette of 1765 and details from
A Design for two Chimneys in Diverse maniere of 1769 (see
fig. 2) are two such examples.
In one of the few built examples of Piranesi’s oeuvre, the image of the Gorgon was used to adorn
the Piazzetta of the Knights of Malta, positioned once again at the center of
an ornamental frame. But equally indispensable to Piranesi’s mercurial iconography
was the 
image
of the serpent. Throughout Diverse maniere, an elaborate array of sinuous
creatures were used in the ornamentation of fireplace surrounds. Featured in
countless proposals, they were the figural basis for Piranesi’s use of the serpentine
line (see fig. 4). And in a drawing plate of the Apologetical Essay in Defense
of Egyptian and Tuscan Architecture of 1769, Piranesi advanced the serpent
as a key figure of ancient Etrurian iconography, drawn and catalogued ( and
labeled n.84) alongside a collection of114 Etrurian ornaments, including temples,
amphitheaters, aqueducts, centaurs, masks and herms (see fig. 5).
(see
figs. 6 & 7); it “corresponds to the element of fire, to the final alchemical
stage of nigredo, as well as to the hour of dusk, and to the season of
autumn.”
architectural character: the penchant for translating
moral, psychological and emotional states into architectural emblems. In the
choice of ornaments expressive of a patron’s manners, habits and proclivities,
the Cabinet became the room par excellence for the depiction of Caractère.
Socially and politically, the decorative program of the Cabinet constituted
an important form of visual rhetoric. And Piranesi had undoubtedly been personally
familiar with this type of commission having built and represented in Diverse
maniere his designs for the Earl of Exeter in England, for Cavaliere Giovanni
Hope of Holland and for the Roman Senator, Prince Abbondio Rezzonico (see fig.
8).
No architect had derived a room’s entire decorative program
from a single architectural feature and non had made the fireplace the centre
of an ornamental language. Only Piranesi’s designs privileged and honored this
highly symbolic architectural orifice. Throughout the nearly 60 schemes, no
other window or door was ever depicted. Countless details were lavished on the
heads and jambs of both frame and aperture. Figures as diverse as swans, griffins,
masks, ram heads, lyres, garlands, acanthus leaves, dolphins and serpents were
all represented. The inventiveness of their combinations made of them highly
eccentric schemas. But Piranesi’s ingenium did not end at the fireplace
surround. Where Piranesi had not designed a fire-screen for the fireplace opening,
he had portrayed the presence of a highly animated fire. In well over half of
his designs, the orifice is ablaze with ascending flames and smoke, etched with
equal veracity and detail. For Piranesi had not only depicted the physical characteristics
of the Cabinet, but had ventured to dramatize its metaphysical ones as
well (see fig. 9).
Piranesi’s fascination with the iconography of Alchemy was furthermore made
manifest in his admiration for ancient Egypt. In Diverse maniere he theorized
a return to this archaic civilization: his ardent respect registered in both
text and image. The greater part of his fireplace designs depicted proposals
à la Egyptienne replete with hieroglyphs, sphinxes, felines, and
divine figures of all kinds (see fig 10). In addition, the introductory pages
of his accompanying text were devoted to the categorical defense of ancient
Egyptian architecture as Piranesi argued for its meritorious sculpture and symbols. 
In
so stating Piranesi had justified the disproportionate and capricious quality
of much Egyptian figuration, advancing a theory of human artifice which chose
to operate beyond the limits of what was physically possible in Nature (see
fig. 11). 
Piranesi
had defended his obsession with ancient Egypt and as the number of designs which
he conceived in the Egyptian manner attest, his veneration for this most ancient
of Hermetic cultures was unequivocal. When faced with the design and construction
of the Caffe dei Inglese, Piranesi not surprisingly adopted an
ornamental schema replete with Egyptian figuration. Built just prior to the
publication of Diverse maniere and steps from the Piazza di Spagna, the
interiors of the Caffe were ornamented using his newly conceived ornamental
language. And while the recipient of many an unfavourable critique, Piranesi
chose to include its design in two of the drawing plates of Diverse maniere
(see fig. 12).