Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire

Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire

 

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire

 

Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire

 

Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire

 

Aurelian
Augustus Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire
Emperor of the Roman Empire
Reign	September 270 – September or October 275
Predecessor	Quintillus
Successor	Tacitus
Born	9 September 214 or 215 Sirmium, (present-day Sremska Mitrovica, Serbia)
Died	September 25 275 Caenophrurium, Thrace (present-day Turkey)
Spouse	Ulpia Severina
Full name Lucius Domitius Aurelianus Regnal name Imperator Caesar Lucius Domitius Aurelianus Augustus
Mother	Freedwoman of the clan Aurelius and Priestess of Sol Invictus in her native village.

Giacobbe Giusti, AURELIAN, Emperor of the Roman Empire

^[1] Bust of a Roman Emperor usually thought of as a bust of Claudius II, however there is a possibility that this bust is actually the bust of Aurelian, since the Roman who buried this would have probably buried a statue of Aurelian along with Claudius II and the other busts found in the Brescia temple. Features of the statue do match the face of Aurelian depicted on coins.

Aurelian (Latin: Lucius Domitius Aurelianus Augustus;^[a] 9 September 214 or 215 – September or October 275) was Roman Emperor from 270 to 275. Born in humble circumstances, he rose through the military ranks to become emperor. During his reign, he defeated the Alamanni after a devastating war. He also defeated the Goths, Vandals, Juthungi, Sarmatians, and Carpi. Aurelian restored the Empire’s eastern provinces after his conquest of the Palmyrene Empire in 273. The following year he conquered the Gallic Empire in the west, reuniting the Empire in its entirety. He was also responsible for the construction of the Aurelian Walls in Rome, and the abandonment of the province of Dacia.

His successes were instrumental in ending the Roman Empire’s Crisis of the Third Century, earning him the title Restitutor Orbis or « Restorer of the World ». Although Domitian was the first emperor who had demanded to be officially hailed as dominus et deus(master and god), these titles never occurred in written form on official documents until the reign of Aurelian.^[2]

Early life

Aurelian was born on 9 September, most likely in 214 AD, although 215 AD is also possible.^[3] The ancient sources do not agree on his place of birth, although he was generally accepted as being a native of Illyricum but, another common belief was that he was born in Greece. Sirmium in Pannonia Inferior (now Sremska Mitrovica, Serbia) is the preferred location,^[4] which was created by Aurelian as Emperor when he abandoned the old trans-Danubian territory of Dacia. The academic consensus is that he was of humble birth and that his father was a peasant-farmer who took his Roman nomen from his landlord, a senator of the clan Aurelius.^[5] Saunders suggests that his family might in fact have been of Roman settler origin and of much higher social status; however, his suggestion has not been taken up by his more recent academic colleagues such as Southern and Watson.

Using the evidence of the ancient sources, it was at one time suggested that Aurelian’s mother was a freedwoman of a member of the clan Aurelius and that she herself was a priestess of the Sun-Godin her native village. These two propositions, together with the tradition that the clan Aurelius had been entrusted with the maintenance of that deity’s cult in Rome, inspired the notion that this could explain the devotion to the sun-god that Aurelian was to manifest as Emperor – see below. However, it seems that this pleasant extrapolation of dubious facts is now generally accepted as being no more than just that.^[6]

Military career

It is commonly accepted that Aurelian probably joined the army in 235 AD at around age twenty.^[5] It is also generally assumed that, as a member of the lowest rank of society—albeit a citizen^[b]—he would have enlisted in the ranks of the legions. Saunders suggests that his career is more easily understood if it is assumed that his family was of Roman settler origins with a tradition of military service and that he enlisted as an equestrian.^[7] This would have opened up for him the tres militia—the three steps of the equestrian military career—one of the routes to higher equestrian office in the Imperial Service.^[c] This could be a more expeditious route to senior military and procuratorialoffices than that pursued by ex-rankers, although not necessarily less laborious.^[d] However, Saunders’s conjecture as to Aurelian’s early career is not supported by any evidence other than his nomen which could indicate Italian settler ancestry – although even this is contested – and his rise to the highest ranks which is more easily understood if he did not have to start from the bottom. His suggestion has not been taken up by other academic authorities.

Whatever his origins, Aurelian certainly must have built up a very solid reputation for military competence during the tumultuous mid-decades of the century. To be sure, the exploits detailed in the Historia Augustavita Divi Aureliani, while not always impossible, are not supported by any independent evidence and one at least is demonstrably an invention typical of that author.^[8] However, he was probably associated with Gallienus’s cavalry army and shone as an officer of that corps d’élite because, when he finally emerged in a historically reliable context in the early part of the reign of Claudius II, he seems to have been its commander.^[9]

Service under Gallienus

His successes as a cavalry commander ultimately made him a member of emperor Gallienus‘ entourage. In 268, Aurelian and his cavalry participated in general Claudius‘ victory over the Goths at the Battle of Naissus.^[10] Later that year Gallienus traveled to Italy and fought Aureolus, his former general and now usurper for the throne. Driving Aureolus back into Mediolanum, Gallienus promptly besieged his adversary in the city. However, while the siege was ongoing the Emperor was assassinated. One source says Aurelian, who was present at the siege, participated and supported general Claudius for the purple – which is plausible.^[11]

Aurelian was married to Ulpia Severina, about whom little is known. Like Aurelian she was from Dacia.^[12] They are known to have had a daughter together.^[13]

Service under Claudius

Claudius was acclaimed Emperor by the soldiers outside Mediolanum. The new Emperor immediately ordered the senate to deify Gallienus. Next, he began to distance himself from those responsible for his predecessor’s assassination, ordering the execution of those directly involved.^[14] Aureolus was still besieged in Mediolanum and sought reconciliation with the new emperor, but Claudius had no sympathy for a potential rival. The emperor had Aureolus killed and one source implicates Aurelian in the deed, perhaps even signing the warrant for his death himself.^[14]

During the reign of Claudius, Aurelian was promoted rapidly: he was given command of the elite Dalmatian cavalry, and was soon promoted to overall Magister equitum, effectively the head of the army after the Emperor – and the Emperor Claudius’ own position before his acclamation.^[14] The war against Aureolus and the concentration of forces in Italy allowed the Alamanni to break through the Rhaetian limes along the upper Danube. Marching through Raetia and the Alpsunhindered, they entered northern Italy and began pillaging the area. In early 269, emperor Claudius and Aurelian marched north to meet the Alamanni, defeating them decisively at the Battle of Lake Benacus.^[15]

While still dealing with the defeated enemy, news came from the Balkans reporting large-scale attacks from the Heruli, Goths, Gepids, and Bastarnae.^[15] Claudius immediately dispatched Aurelian to the Balkans to contain the invasion as best he could until Claudius could arrive with his main army.^[16] The Goths were besieging Thessalonicawhen they heard of emperor Claudius’ approach, causing them to abandon the siege and pillage north-eastern Macedonia. Aurelian intercepted the Goths with his Dalmatian cavalry and defeated them in a series of minor skirmishes, killing as many as three thousand of the enemy. Aurelian continued to harass the enemy, driving them northward into Upper Moesia where emperor Claudius had assembled his main army. The ensuing battle was indecisive: the northward advance of the Goths was halted but Roman losses were heavy.^[16]

Claudius could not afford another pitched battle, so he instead laid a successful ambush, killing thousands. However, the majority of the Goths escaped and began retreating south the way they had come. For the rest of year, Aurelian harassed the enemy with his Dalmatian cavalry.^[17]

Now stranded in Roman territory, the Goths’ lack of provisions began to take its toll. Aurelian, sensing his enemies’ desperation, attacked them with the full force of his cavalry, killing many and driving the remainder westward into Thrace.^[17] As winter set in, the Goths retreated into the Haemus Mountains, only to find themselves trapped and surrounded. The harsh conditions now exacerbated their shortage of food. However, the Romans underestimated the Goths and let their guard down, allowing the enemy to break through their lines and escape. Apparently emperor Claudius ignored advice, perhaps from Aurelian, and withheld the cavalry and sent in only the infantry to stop their break-out.

The determined Goths killed many of the oncoming infantry and were only prevented from slaughtering them all when Aurelian finally charged in with his Dalmatian cavalry. The Goths still managed to escape and continued their march through Thrace.^[17] The Roman army continued to follow the Goths during the spring and summer of 270. Meanwhile, a devastating plague swept through the Balkans, killing many soldiers in both armies.

Emperor Claudius fell ill on the march to the battle and returned to his regional headquarters in Sirmium, leaving Aurelian in charge of operations against the Goths.^[17] Aurelian used his cavalry to great effect, breaking the Goths into smaller groups which were easier to deal with. By late summer the Goths were defeated: any survivors were stripped of their animals and booty and were levied into the army or settled as farmers in frontier regions.^[17] Aurelian had no time to relish his victories; in late August news arrived from Sirmium that emperor Claudius was dead.^[18]

Opposition to Quintillus

When Claudius died, his brother Quintillus seized power with support of the Senate. With an act typical of the Crisis of the Third Century, the army refused to recognize the new Emperor, preferring to support one of its own commanders: Aurelian was proclaimed emperor in September 270 by the legions in Sirmium. Aurelian defeated Quintillus’ troops, and was recognized as Emperor by the Senate after Quintillus’ death. The claim that Aurelian was chosen by Claudius on his death bed^[19] can be dismissed as propaganda; later, probably in 272, Aurelian put his own dies imperii the day of Claudius’ death, thus implicitly considering Quintillus a usurper.^[20]

With his base of power secure, he now turned his attention to Rome’s greatest problems — recovering the vast territories lost over the previous two decades, and reforming the res publica.

Emperor

The Roman Empire in the 270s

Aurelian was a military commander, and during his reign he tried to keep legions’ fidelity; this coin celebrated the CONCORDIA MILITVM, « concord of the soldiers » – in other words, « harmony between the emperor and the military ».

In 248, Emperor Philip the Arab had celebrated the millennium of the city of Rome with great and expensive ceremonies and games, and the Empire had given a tremendous proof of self-confidence. In the following years, however, the Empire had to face a huge pressure from external enemies, while, at the same time, dangerous civil wars threatened the empire from within, with usurpers weakening the strength of the state. Also, the economic substrate of the state, agriculture and commerce, suffered from the disruption caused by the instability. On top of this an epidemic swept through the Empire around 250, greatly diminishing manpower both for the army and for agriculture.

The end result was that the Empire could not endure the blow of the capture of Emperor Valerian in 260 by the Sassanids. The eastern provinces found their protectors in the rulers of the city of Palmyra, in Syria, whose autonomy grew until the formation of the Palmyrene Empire, which was successful in defending against the Sassanidthreat. The western provinces, those facing the limes of the Rhine, seceded to form a third, autonomous state within the territories of the Roman Empire, which is now known as the Gallic Empire.

In Rome, the Emperor was occupied with internal menaces to his power and with the defense of Italia and the Balkans.

Reunification of the empire

The first actions of the new Emperor were aimed at strengthening his own position in his territories. Late in 270, Aurelian campaigned in northern Italia against the Vandals, Juthungi, and Sarmatians, expelling them from Roman territory. To celebrate these victories, Aurelian was granted the title of Germanicus Maximus.^[21] The authority of the Emperor was challenged by several usurpers — Septimius, Urbanus, Domitianus, and the rebellion of Felicissimus — who tried to exploit the sense of insecurity of the empire and the overwhelming influence of the armies in Roman politics. Aurelian, being an experienced commander, was aware of the importance of the army, and his propaganda, known through his coinage, shows he wanted the support of the legions.^[20]

Defending Italy against the Iuthungi

The Porta Asinara, a gate in the Aurelian Walls.

The burden of the northern barbarians was not yet over, however. In 271, the Alamannimoved towards Italia, entering the Po plain and sacking the villages; they passed the Po River, occupied Placentia and moved towards Fano. Aurelian, who was in Pannonia to control the Vandals‘ withdrawal, quickly entered Italia, but his army was defeated in an ambush near Placentia(January 271). When the news of the defeat arrived in Rome, it caused great fear for the arrival of the barbarians. But Aurelian attacked the Alamanni camping near the Metaurus River, defeating them in the Battle of Fano, and forcing them to re-cross the Po river; Aurelian finally routed them at Pavia. For this, he received the title Germanicus Maximus. However, the menace of the Germanic people and a Germanic invasion was still perceived by the Romans as likely, so Aurelian resolved to build a new system of walls around Rome that became known as the Aurelian Walls.^[22]

Defeat of the Goths and abandonment of Dacia[edit]

The emperor led his legions to the Balkans, where he defeated and routed the Goths beyond the Danube, killing the Gothic leader Cannabaudes, and assuming the title of Gothicus Maximus. However, he decided to abandon the province of Dacia, on the exposed north bank of the Danube, as too difficult and expensive to defend. He reorganized a new province of Dacia south of the Danube, inside the former Moesia, called Dacia Aureliana, with Serdica as the capital.^[23]

Conquest of the Palmyrene Empire[edit]

The Roman Empire by 271 A.D before the reconquest of the Palmyrene Empire and the Gallic Empire by Aurelian

Aurelian, personification of Sol, defeats the Palmyrene Empire, and celebrates ORIENS AVG – oriens Augusti: the rising sun/star of Augustus.

The route of Aurelian’s campaign against Palmyra.

In 272, Aurelian turned his attention to the lost eastern provinces of the empire, the so-called « Palmyrene Empire » ruled by Queen Zenobia from the city of Palmyra.^[24]Zenobia had carved out her own empire, encompassing Syria, Palestine, Egypt and large parts of Asia Minor. The Syrian queen cut off Rome’s shipments of grain, and in a matter of weeks, the Romans started running low on bread. In the beginning, Aurelian had been recognized as Emperor, while Vaballathus, the son of Zenobia, held the title of rexand imperator (« king » and « supreme military commander »), but Aurelian decided to invade the eastern provinces as soon as he felt his army to be strong enough.

Asia Minor was recovered easily; every city but Byzantium and Tyanasurrendered to him with little resistance. The fall of Tyana lent itself to a legend: Aurelian to that point had destroyed every city that resisted him, but he spared Tyana after having a vision of the great 1st-century philosopher Apollonius of Tyana, whom he respected greatly, in a dream.

Apollonius implored him, stating, « Aurelian, if you desire to rule, abstain from the blood of the innocent! Aurelian, if you will conquer, be merciful! » Whatever the reason, Aurelian spared Tyana. It paid off; many more cities submitted to him upon seeing that the Emperor would not exact revenge upon them. Within six months, his armies stood at the gates of Palmyra, which surrendered when Zenobia tried to flee to the Sassanid Empire. The « Palmyrene Empire » was no more.

Eventually Zenobia and her son were captured and made to walk on the streets of Rome in his triumph, the woman in golden chains. With the grain stores once again shipped to Rome, Aurelian’s soldiers handed out free bread to the citizens of the city, and the Emperor was hailed a hero by his subjects. After a brief clash with the Persians and another in Egypt against the usurper Firmus, Aurelian was obliged to return to Palmyra in 273 when that city rebelled once more. This time, Aurelian allowed his soldiers to sack the city, and Palmyra never recovered. More honors came his way; he was now known as Parthicus Maximus and Restitutor Orientis (« Restorer of the East »).^[20]

The rich province of Egypt was also recovered by Aurelian. The Brucheion (Royal Quarter) in Alexandria was burned to the ground. This section of the city once contained the Library of Alexandria, although the extent of the surviving Library in Aurelian’s time is uncertain.

Conquest of the Gallic Empire

In 274, the victorious emperor turned his attention to the west, and the « Gallic Empire » which had already been reduced in size by Claudius II. Aurelian won this campaign largely through diplomacy; the « Gallic Emperor » Tetricus was willing to abandon his throne and allow Gaul and Britain to return to the Empire, but could not openly submit to Aurelian. Instead, the two seem to have conspired so that when the armies met at Châlons-en-Champagne that autumn, Tetricus simply deserted to the Roman camp and Aurelian easily defeated the Gallic army facing him.^{[citation needed]} Tetricus was rewarded for his part in the conspiracy with a high-ranking position in Italy itself.

A Radiate of Aurelian

A Radiate of Aurelian

Aurelian returned to Rome and won his last honorific from the Senate – Restitutor Orbis (« Restorer of the World »). This title was first assumed by Aurelian in late summer of 272, and had been carried previously by both Valerian and Gallienus.^[12] In four years, Aurelian had secured the frontiers of the Empire and reunified it, effectively giving the Empire a new lease on life that lasted 200 years.

Reforms

Aurelian was a reformer, and settled many important functions of the imperial apparatus, dealing with the economy and religion. He restored many public buildings, re-organized the management of the food reserves, set fixed prices for the most important goods, and prosecuted misconduct by the public officers.^[25]

Religious reform

Aurelian strengthened the position of the Sun god Sol Invictus as the main divinity of the Roman pantheon. His intention was to give to all the peoples of the Empire, civilian or soldiers, easterners or westerners, a single god they could believe in without betraying their own gods. The center of the cult was a new temple, built in 274 and dedicated on December 25^[26] of that year in the Campus Agrippae in Rome, with great decorations financed by the spoils of the Palmyrene Empire.

During his short rule, Aurelian seemed to follow the principle of « one faith, one empire », which would not be made official until the Edict of Thessalonica. He appears with the title deus et dominus natus (« God and born ruler ») on some of his coins, a style also later adopted by Diocletian. Lactantius argued that Aurelian would have outlawed all the other gods if he had had enough time. He was recorded by Christian historians as having organized persecutions.^[27]

Felicissimus’ rebellion and coinage reform

Aurelian’s reign records the only uprising of mint workers. The rationalis Felicissimus, a senior public financial official whose responsibilities included supervision of the mint at Rome, revolted against Aurelian. The revolt seems to have been caused by the fact that the mint workers, and Felicissimus first, were accustomed to stealing the silver for the coins and producing coins of inferior quality. Aurelian wanted to eliminate this, and put Felicissimus on trial. The rationalis incited the mintworkers to revolt: the rebellion spread in the streets, even if it seems that Felicissimus was killed immediately, presumably executed.

The Palmyrene rebellion in Egypt had probably reduced the grain supply to Rome, thus disaffecting the population to the emperor. This rebellion also had the support of some senators, probably those who had supported the election of Quintillus, and thus had something to fear from Aurelian.

Aurelian ordered the urban cohorts, reinforced by some regular troops of the imperial army, to attack the rebelling mob: the resulting battle, fought on the Caelian hill, marked the end of the revolt, even if at a high price (some sources give the figure, probably exaggerated, of 7,000 casualties).^[25] Many of the rebels were executed; also some of the supporting senators were put to death. The mint of Rome was closed temporarily, and the institution of several other mints caused the main mint of the empire to lose its hegemony.^[28]

His monetary reformation included the introduction of antoninianicontaining 5% silver. They bore the mark XXI (or its Greek numerals form KA), which meant that twenty of such coins would contain the same silver quantity of an old silver denarius.^[29][e] Considering that this was an improvement over the previous situation gives an idea of the severity of the economic situation Aurelian faced. The Emperor struggled to introduce the new « good » coin by recalling all the old « bad » coins prior to their introduction.^[20]

A very large number of rare gold coins of Aurelian have been discovered as part of the Lava Treasure in Corsica, France, in the 1980s.^[30]

Death

In 275, Aurelian marched towards Asia Minor, preparing another campaign against the Sassanids: the deaths of Kings Shapur I (272) and Hormizd I (273) in quick succession, and the rise to power of a weakened ruler (Bahram I), presented the opportunity to attack the Sassanid Empire.

On his way, the Emperor suppressed a revolt in Gaul — possibly against Faustinus, an officer or usurper of Tetricus — and defeated barbarian marauders in Vindelicia (Germany).

However, Aurelian never reached Persia, as he was murdered while waiting in Thrace to cross into Asia Minor. As an administrator, Aurelian had been very strict and handed out severe punishments to corrupt officials or soldiers. A secretary of Aurelian (called Eros by Zosimus) had told a lie on a minor issue. In fear of what the Emperor might do, he forged a document listing the names of high officials marked by the emperor for execution and showed it to collaborators. The notarius Mucapor and other high-ranking officers of the Praetorian Guard, fearing punishment from the Emperor, murdered him in September 275, in Caenophrurium, Thrace (modern Turkey).

Aurelian’s enemies in the Senate briefly succeeded in passing damnatio memoriae on the Emperor, but this was reversed before the end of the year and Aurelian, like his predecessor Claudius II, was deified as Divus Aurelianus.

There is substantial evidence that Aurelian’s wife Ulpia Severina, who had been declared Augusta in 274, may have ruled the Empire by her own power for some time after his death.^[12][13] The sources indicate that there was an interregnum between Aurelian’s death and the election of Marcus Claudius Tacitus as his successor. Additionally, some of Ulpia’s coins appear to have been minted after Aurelian’s death.^[13]

Legacy

Aurelian’s short reign reunited a fragmented Empire while saving Rome from barbarian invasions that had reached Italy itself. His death prevented a full restoration of political stability and a lasting dynasty that could end the cycle of assassination of emperors and civil war that marked this period. Even so, he brought the Empire through a very critical period in its history and, without Aurelian, it may never have survived the invasions and fragmentation of the decade in which he reigned. Moreover, the Western half of the Empire would survive another two hundred years, while the East would last another millennium, and for that Aurelian must be allowed much of the credit.^{[citation needed]}

The city of Orléans in France is named after Aurelian. Originally named Cenabum, Aurelian rebuilt and renamed it Aurelianum or Aureliana Civitas (« city of Aurelian », cité d’Aurélien), which evolved into Orléans. The city of New Orleans (in French, La Nouvelle-Orléans), in Louisiana, United States is named after the commune of Orléans, and therefore by extension, Aurelian.^[31]

Notes

1. ^ In Classical Latin, Aurelian’s name would be inscribed as LVCIVS DOMITIVS AVRELIANVS AVGVSTVS. His full name, with honorific and victory titles, was Imperator Caesar Lucius Domitius Aurelianus Augustus, Germanicus Maximus, Gothicus Maximus, Parthicus Maximus, Restitutor Orientis, Restitutor Orbis.
2. ^ Had Aurelian’s family been enfranchised by virtue of the Constitutio Antoniniana (212 AD) his nomen would have been « Aurelius ».
3. ^ The tres militia were: (i) prefecture of a cohort of auxiliary infantry; (ii) tribunate of a legionary cohort; and (iii) prefecture of an ala of auxiliary cavalry.
4. ^ Compare the career of Pertinax who pursued the Tres Militia with those of Publius Aelius Aelianus, Lucius Aurelius Marcianus (both probably) and Traianus Mucianus (certainly) who rose e caliga, i.e. through the ranks.
5. ^ Later emperors Tacitus and Carus would mint coins with the legends XI or IA, signalling a 10% of silver in the alloy.

References

1. ^ White 2015, p. 139.
2. ^ Halsberghe, G.H. (1972). The Cult of Sol Invictus. Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire romain. Brill. p. 152. Retrieved 2018-04-13.
3. ^ Saunders 1992, pp. 104-6.
4. ^ Milošević(2010:pp 106-7)^{[incomplete short citation]}
5. ^ Jump up to:^a b Watson 1999, p. 1.
6. ^ Saunders 1992, p. 107.
7. ^ Saunders 1992, p. 109.
8. ^ For instance, vita Divi Aureliani paras 5.5-6, 6.3-5, and 7.1-2. If he ever was a tribune of a legion as suggested in 7.1-2 it could not have been with Legio VII Gallicana as that unit never existed.
9. ^ Saunders 1992, pp. 129-130.
10. ^ Watson 1999, p. 41.
11. ^ Aurelius Victor, xxxiii,21. Other sources do not cite Aurelian among those who conspired against Gallienus, though different sources have claimed that he was the one who called Gallienus out of his tent under a proposed « conspiracy » at that point Gallienus was stabbbed.
12. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Watson 1999.
13. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Körner, Christian (23 December 2008). « Aurelian (A.D. 270–275) ». De Imperatoribus Romanis: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and Their Families. Archived from the original on 2 December 2010. Retrieved 6 January 2011.
14. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Watson 1999, p. 42.
15. ^ Jump up to:^a b Watson 1999, p. 43.
16. ^ Jump up to:^a b Watson 1999, p. 44.
17. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} Watson 1999, p. 45.
18. ^ Watson 1999, p. 46.
19. ^ Zonaras.
20. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Korner.
21. ^ Zosimus, 1,48f.; Eutropius; Dexippus, FGrH IIA 460 F7; Historia Augusta – Aurelianus xxi,1–3 and xviii,2.
22. ^ Watson 1999, pp. 51–54, 217.
23. ^ Watson 1999, pp. 54–55.
24. ^ The war against the Palmyrene Empire is described in Zosimus, 1,50,1–1,61,1, and Historia Augusta, Aurelianus, 22–31.
25. ^ Jump up to:^a b  Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). « Aurelian » . Encyclopædia Britannica. 2 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 923–924.
26. ^ Clauss, Manfred (2001). Die römischen Kaiser : 55 historische Portraits von Caesar bis Iustinian (in German). München: Beck. p. 250. ISBN 978-3-406-47288-6.
27. ^ For example, in the Annales Cambriae, B & C Texts.
28. ^ Watson 1999, pp. 52–53.
29. ^ Watson 1999, p. 130.
30. ^ Sylvianne Estiot, The Lava Treasure of Roman Gold. Also in Trésors monétaires, volume XXIV, BNF, 2011 ISBN 9782717724929
31. ^ For an exact etymology, see Debal, Jacques (1996). Cenabum, Aurelianis, Orléans. Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon. ISBN 978-2-7297-0554-1.

Primary sources

• Aurelius Victor Epitome de Caesaribus, xxxv « Epitome de Caesaribus » (4th century)
• Eutropius, Breviarium historiae Romanae, IX. 13–15 (4th century)
• Historia Augusta Aurelianus Life of Aurelian Part 1 Part 2 Part 3
• Zosimus, Historia Nova Translation of the Historia Nova (published in 1814), book 1, (5th–6th century)
• Joannes Zonaras, Compendium of History Compendium excerpt: Claudius to Diocletian 268–284 (12th century)

Secondary sources

• Körner, Christian (2001-07-20). « Aurelian ». De Imperatoribus Romanis. Archived from the original on 20 October 2006. Retrieved 2006-11-04. (Korner:2001)
• Saunders, Randall Titus (1992). A biography of the Emperor Aurelian (AD 270-275). Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services.
• Southern, Pat (2001). The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine. Routledge. p. 125. ISBN 0-415-23944-3.(Southern:2001);
• Watson, Alaric (1999). Aurelian and the Third Century. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-07248-4.

Further reading

• White, John (2015). The Roman Emperor Aurelian : Restorer of the World. Casemate Publishers and Book Distributors, LLC. ISBN 978-1-4738-4569-5.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurelian

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

Part of the Second Punic War Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae
Hannibal’s route of invasion
Date 2 August 216 BC Location Cannae, Italy 41°18′23″N 16°7′57″ECoordinates: 41°18′23″N 16°7′57″E Result Carthaginian victory[a] See the Aftermath
Belligerents
Carthage Allied African, Spanish, and Gallic tribes	Roman Republic Allied Italian states: Etruscans Samnites Iapyges
Commanders and leaders
Hannibal Maharbal Mago Gisgo Hanno Hasdrubal	Gaius Terentius Varro Lucius Aemilius Paullus † Gnaeus Servilius Geminus †
Strength
50,000: 32,000 heavy infantry, 8,000 light infantry, 10,000 cavalry	86,400: 40,000 Roman infantry, 40,000 allied infantry, 2,400 Roman cavalry, 4,000 allied cavalry
Casualties and losses
Killed: 5,700 (Polybius) 4,000 Gallic 1,500 Spanish and African 200 cavalry	Polybius: 85,630 70,000 infantry killed 5,630 cavalry killed 10,000 infantry captured Livy: 67,500 45,500 infantry killed 2,700 cavalry killed 17,800 infantry captured 1,500 cavalry captured

show v t e Second Punic War

Battles of Trebia, Lake Trasimeneand Cannae, anticlockwise, from top

The Battle of Cannae (/ˈkæni, –eɪ, –aɪ/)^[b] was a major battle of the Second Punic War that took place on 2 August 216 BC in Apulia, in southeast Italy. The army of Carthage, under Hannibal, surrounded and decisively defeated a larger army of the Roman Republicunder the consulsLucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius Varro. It is regarded both as one of the greatest tacticalfeats in military history and as one of the worst defeats in Roman history.

Having recovered from their losses at Trebia (218 BC) and Lake Trasimene (217 BC), the Romans decided to engage Hannibal at Cannae, with approximately 86,000 Roman and allied troops. They massed their heavy infantry in a deeper formation than usual, while Hannibal used the double-envelopmenttactic and surrounded his enemy, trapping the majority of the Roman army, who were then slaughtered. The loss of life on the Roman side was one of the most lethal single day’s fighting in history; Adrian Goldsworthy equates the death toll at Cannae to « the massed slaughter of the British Army on the first day of the Somme offensive in 1916. »^[1] Only about 15,000 Romans, most of whom were from the garrisons of the camps and had not taken part in the battle, escaped death. Following the defeat, Capuaand several other Italian city-states defected from the Roman Republic to Carthage.

As news of this defeat reached Rome, the city was gripped in panic. Authorities resorted to extraordinary measures, which included consulting the Sibylline Oracles, dispatching a delegation led by Quintus Fabius Pictor to consult the Delphic oracle in Greece, and burying four people alive as a sacrifice to their Gods. To raise two new legions, the authorities lowered the draft age and enlisted criminals, debtors and even slaves. Despite the extreme loss of men and equipment, and a second massive defeat later that same year at Silva Litana, the Romans refused to surrender to Hannibal. His offer to ransom survivors was brusquely refused. With grim determination the Romans fought for 14 more years until they achieved victory at the Battle of Zama.

Although for most of the following decades the battle was seen solely as a major Roman disaster, by modern times Cannae acquired a mythic quality, and is often used as an example of the perfect defeat of an enemy army. It was studied by German strategists prior to World War II, and General Norman Schwartzkopf claimed to have drawn inspiration from Hannibal’s success for his devastatingly effective land offensive in the First Gulf War.

Strategic background

Shortly after the start of the Second Punic War, Hannibal crossed into Italy by traversing the Pyrenees and the Alps during the summer and early autumn of 218 BC.^[2] He quickly won major victories over the Romans at Trebia and at Lake Trasimene.^[3][4] After these losses, the Romans appointed Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus as dictator to deal with the threat.^[5][6] Fabius used attrition warfare against Hannibal, cutting off his supply lines and avoiding pitched battles. These tactics proved unpopular with the Romans who, as they recovered from the shock of Hannibal’s victories, began to question the wisdom of the Fabian strategy, which had given the Carthaginian army a chance to regroup.^[7] The majority of Romans were eager to see a quick conclusion to the war. It was feared that, if Hannibal continued plundering Italy unopposed, Rome’s allies might defect to the Carthaginian side for self-preservation.^[8]

Therefore, when Fabius came to the end of his term, the Senate did not renew his dictatorial powers and command was given to consuls Gnaeus Servilius Geminus and Marcus Atilius Regulus.^[9] In 216 BC, when elections resumed, Gaius Terentius Varro and Lucius Aemilius Paullus were elected as consuls, placed in command of a newly raised army of unprecedented size and directed to engage Hannibal.^[10]Polybius wrote:

The Senate determined to bring eight legions into the field, which had never been done at Rome before, each legion consisting of five thousand men besides allies. …Most of their wars are decided by one consul and two legions, with their quota of allies; and they rarely employ all four at one time and on one service. But on this occasion, so great was the alarm and terror of what would happen, they resolved to bring not only four but eight legions into the field.

— Polybius, The Histories of Polybius^[11]

Estimates of Roman troop numbers

Rome typically employed four legions each year, each consisting of 4,000 foot soldiers and 200 cavalry.^[12] Perceiving the Carthaginian army as a real threat, for the first time ever the Senate introduced eight legions, each consisting of 5,000 foot soldiers and 300 cavalry, with allied troops numbering the same amount of foot soldiers but 900 cavalry per legion—more than triple the legion numbers.^[13] Eight legions—some 40,000 Roman soldiers and an estimated 2,400 cavalry—formed the core of this massive new army.^[14] Livy quotes one source stating the Romans added only 10,000 men to their usual army.^[15] While no definitive number of Roman troops exists, all sources agree that the Carthaginians faced a considerably larger foe.

Roman command

Consuls were each assigned two of the four legions to command, rarely employing all four legions at once to the same assignment. However, the Senate feared a real threat and not only deployed all four legions to the field but all eight, including allies.^[13] Ordinarily, each of the two consuls would command his own portion of the army, but since the two armies were combined into one, Roman law required them to alternate their command on a daily basis. The traditional account puts Varro in command on the day of the battle, and much of the blame for the defeat has been laid on his shoulders.^[16] However, his low origins seem to be exaggerated in the sources, and Varro may have been made a scapegoat by the aristocratic establishment.^[16] He lacked the powerful descendants that Paullus had, descendants who were willing and able to protect his reputation — most notably, Paullus was the grandfather of Scipio Aemilianus, the patron of Polybius (one of the main sources of this history).^[17]

Prelude

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

A modern monument near the site of the Battle of Cannae

In the spring of 216 BC Hannibal took the initiative and seized the large supply depot at Cannae, in the Apulian plain, placing himself between the Romans and their crucial source of supply.^[18] As Polybius noted, the capture of Cannae « caused great commotion in the Roman army; for it was not only the loss of the place and the stores in it that distressed them, but the fact that it commanded the surrounding district ».^[11] The consuls, resolving to confront Hannibal, marched southward in search of him.^[19] After two days’ march, they found him on the left bank of the river Aufidus, and encamped five miles (8 km) away.^[19]

Varro, in command on the first day, is presented by contemporary sources as a man of reckless nature and hubris, who was determined to defeat Hannibal. While the Romans were approaching Cannae, some of Hannibal’s light infantry and cavalry ambushed them.^[20] Varro repelled the attack and continued slowly on his way to Cannae.^[20]This victory, though essentially a mere skirmish with no lasting strategic value, greatly bolstered the confidence of the Roman army, perhaps leading to overconfidence on Varro’s part. Paullus, however, was opposed to the engagement as it was taking shape. Unlike Varro, he was prudent and cautious, and he believed it was foolish to fight on open ground, despite the Romans’ numerical strength. This was especially true since Hannibal held the advantage in cavalry (both in quality and quantity). Despite these misgivings, Paullus thought it unwise to withdraw the army after the initial success, and camped two-thirds of the army east of the river Aufidus, sending the remainder to fortify a position on the opposite side one mile (2 km) away from the main camp.^[21] The purpose of this second camp was to cover the foraging parties from the main camp and harass those of the enemy.^[22]

The two armies stayed in their respective locations for two days. During the second day (August 1) Hannibal, aware that Varro would be in command the following day, left his camp and offered battle, but Paullus refused.^[23] When his request was rejected, Hannibal, recognizing the importance of water from the Aufidus to the Roman troops, sent his cavalry to the smaller Roman camp to harass water-bearing soldiers that were found outside the camp fortifications.^[23]According to Polybius,^[11] Hannibal’s cavalry boldly rode up to the edge of the Roman encampment, causing havoc and thoroughly disrupting the supply of water to the Roman camp.^[24]

On the morning of the battle, as the forces drew up, a Carthaginian officer named Gisgo reportedly remarked to Hannibal that the size of the Roman army was astonishing. Hannibal coolly replied, « There is one thing, Gisgo, yet more astonishing, which you take no notice of ». He then explained, « In all those great numbers before us, there is not one man called Gisgo », provoking laughter that spread through the Carthaginian ranks.^[25]

Date

Ancient historians rarely provide the precise dates for the events they describe; for example, Livy provides no explicit dates for any of the battles of the Second Punic War. However, Macrobius, citing the Roman annalist Quintus Claudius Quadrigarius, states the battle was fought ante diem iiii nones Sextilis, or 2 August.^[26]

The months of the pre-Julian Roman calendar are known to not to correspond to its namesake Julian day; for example, Livy records a lunar eclipse in 168 BC as occurring on 4 September, when astronomical calculations show it happened on Julian day 21 June of that year.^[27] This discepency arose from the failure of the pontifices to properly perform intercalations, either by accident or for political advantage. A review of the evidence led P.S. Derow to identify the equivalent Julian date would be 1 July 216 BC; other authorities have suggested other Julian dates.^[28]

Armies

Modern interpretation of a slinger from the Balearic Islands (famous for the skill of their slingers)

Figures for troops involved in ancient battles are often unreliable, and Cannae is no exception. They should be treated with caution, especially those for the Carthaginian side.^[29]The Carthaginian army was a combination of warriors from numerous regions, and may have numbered between 40,000-50,000. Along with the core of an estimated 8,000 Libyans, there were 8,000 Iberians, 16,000 Gauls (8,000 were left at camp the day of battle) and around 5,500 Gaetulian infantry. Hannibal’s cavalry also came from diverse backgrounds. He commanded 4,000 Numidian, 2,000 Iberian, 4,000 Gallic and 450 Libyan-Phoenician cavalry. Finally, Hannibal had around 8,000 skirmishersconsisting of Balearic slingers and mixed-nationality javelinmen. The uniting factor for the Carthaginian army was the personal tie each group had with Hannibal.^[30][31]

Equipment

Rome’s forces used typical Roman equipment including pila (heavy javelins) and hastae (thrusting spears) as weapons as well as traditional bronze helmets, bodyshields and body armor.^[32] On the other hand, the Carthaginian army used a variety of equipment. The Iberians fought with swords suited for cutting and thrusting, as well as javelins and various types of spears.^[33] For defense, Iberian warriors carried large oval shields and often wore a crested helmet made of animal sinews.^[33] Most Gallic foot warriors likely had no protection other than their shields, and the typical Gallic weapon was a long slashing sword.^[34] The heavy Gallic cavalry used the four-horned saddle, with the wealthier ones being clad in mail, a Gallic invention.^[33] The Numidian cavalry were very lightly equipped, lacking saddles and bridles for their horses, and wearing no armor but carrying small shields, javelins and possibly a knife or a longer blade.^[33] Skirmishers acting as light infantry carried either slings or javelins. The Balearic slingers, who were famous for their accuracy, carried short, medium and long slings used to cast stones or bullets. They may have carried a small shield or simple leather pelt on their arms, but this is uncertain. Hannibal himself, like many Roman officers on the opposing side, might have been wearing a bronze musculataand carrying a falcata as his personal sidearm.^[35]

The equipment of the Libyan line infantry has been much debated. Duncan Head has argued in favor of short stabbing spears.^[36]Polybius states that the Libyans fought with equipment taken from previously defeated Romans. It is unclear whether he meant only shields and armor or offensive weapons as well,^[37] though a general reading suggests he meant the whole panoply of arms and armor, and even tactical organization. Apart from his description of the battle itself, when later discussing the subject of the Roman legion versus the Greek phalanx, Polybius says that  » . . . against Hannibal, the defeats they suffered had nothing to do with weapons or formations » because « Hannibal himself . . . discarded the equipment with which he had started out [and] armed his troops with Roman weapons ».^[34] Gregory Daly is inclined to the view that Libyan infantry would have copied the Iberian use of the sword during their fighting there and so were armed similarly to the Romans.^[38] Peter Connolly has argued that they were armed as a pike phalanx.^[39] This has been disputed by Head, because Plutarch states they carried spears shorter than the Roman triarii^[36] and by Daly because they could not have carried an unwieldy pike at the same time as a heavy Roman-style shield.^[37]

Tactical deployment

The conventional deployment for armies of the time was placement of infantry in the center, with the cavalry in two flanking wings. The Romans followed this convention fairly closely, but chose extra depth rather than breadth for the infantry in hopes of breaking quickly through the center of Hannibal’s line.^[40] Varro knew how the Roman infantry had managed to penetrate Hannibal’s center at Trebia, and he planned to recreate this on an even greater scale.^[41] The principeswere stationed immediately behind the hastati, ready to push forward at first contact to ensure the Romans presented a unified front. As Polybius wrote, « the maniples were nearer each other, or the intervals were decreased . . . and the maniples showed more depth than front ».^[11][42] Even though they outnumbered the Carthaginians, this depth-oriented deployment meant that the Roman lines had a front of roughly equal size to their numerically inferior opponents. The typical style of ancient warfare was to continuously pour infantry into the center and attempt to overpower the enemy. Hannibal understood that the Romans fought their battles like this, and he took his outnumbered army and strategically placed them around the enemy to win a tactical victory.^[43]

Initial deployment and Roman attack (in red)

Hannibal had deployed his forces based on the particular fighting qualities of each unit, taking into consideration both their strengths and weaknesses.^[44] This aspect of Hannibal’s leadership was highlighted in the use of a Spanish unit, the Balearic slingers, whom he placed behind the infantry to hurl their ranged missiles into the masses of Roman troops.^[33] He placed his Iberians and Gauls in the middle, alternating the ethnic composition across the front line, with himself at the front and center.^[45] Infantry from Punic Africa was on the wings at the very edge of his infantry line.^[46] These infantry were battle-hardened, remained cohesive and would attack the Roman flanks.

Hasdrubal led the Iberian and Gallic cavalry on the left (south near the river Aufidus) of the Carthaginian army.^[47] By placing the flank of his army on the Aufidus, Hannibal prevented this flank from being overlapped by the more numerous Romans. Hasdrubal was given 6,000–7,000 cavalry, and Hanno had 3,000–4,000 Numidians on the right.^[48][47]

Hannibal intended that his cavalry, comprising mainly medium Hispanic cavalry and Numidian light horse, and positioned on the flanks, would defeat the weaker Roman cavalry and swing around to attack the Roman infantry from the rear as it pressed upon Hannibal’s weakened center.^[49] His veteran African troops would then press in from the flanks at the crucial moment, and encircle the overextended Romans.^[47]

The Romans were in front of the hill leading to Cannae and hemmed in on their right flank by the river Aufidus, so that their left flank was the only viable means of retreat.^[50] In addition, the Carthaginian forces had maneuvered so that the Romans would face east. Not only would the morning sun shine low into the Romans’ eyes, but the southeasterly winds would blow sand and dust into their faces as they approached the battlefield.^[42] Hannibal’s deployment of his army, based on his perception of the terrain and understanding of the capabilities of his troops, proved decisive.

Battle

As the armies advanced on one another, Hannibal gradually extended the center of his line, as Polybius described: « After thus drawing up his whole army in a straight line, he took the central companies of Hispanics and Celts and advanced with them, keeping the rest of them in contact with these companies, but gradually falling off, so as to produce a crescent-shaped formation, the line of the flanking companies growing thinner as it was prolonged, his object being to employ the Africans as a reserve force and to begin the action with the Hispanics and Celts. » Polybius described the weak Carthaginian center as deployed in a crescent, curving out toward the Romans in the middle with the African troops on their flanks in echelon formation.^[11] It is believed that the purpose of this formation was to break the forward momentum of the Roman infantry, and delay its advance before other developments allowed Hannibal to deploy his African infantry most effectively.^[51] While the majority of historians feel that Hannibal’s action was deliberate, some have called this account fanciful, and claim that the actions of the day represent either the natural curvature that occurs when a broad front of infantry marches forward, or the bending back of the Carthaginian center from the shock action of meeting the heavily massed Roman center.^[52]

Destruction of the Roman army

The battle began with a fierce cavalry engagement on the flanks.^[53] Polybius described many of the Hispanic and Celtic horsemen facing the Romans dismounting due to the lack of space to fight on horseback, and called the struggle « barbaric » in the sense of its utter brutality.^[54]When the Iberians and Gauls got the upper hand, they cut down the Roman cavalry without giving quarter.^[55][11] On the other flank the Numidians engaged in a way that merely kept the Roman allied cavalry occupied.^[55] Hasdrubal kept his victorious Hispanic and Gallic cavalry under control and did not chase the retreating Roman right wing.^[55] Instead, he led them to the other side of the field to attack the socii cavalry still fighting the Numidians.^[56] Assailed from both sides, the allied cavalry broke before Hasdrubal could charge into contact and the Numidians pursued them off the field.^[11][56]

While the Carthaginian cavalry were in the process of defeating the Roman horsemen, the masses of infantry on both sides advanced towards each other in the center of the field. The wind from the east blew dust in the Romans’ faces and obscured their vision. While the wind was not a major factor, the dust that both armies created would have been potentially debilitating to sight.^[42] Although it made seeing difficult, troops would still have been able to see others in the vicinity. The dust, however, was not the only psychological factor involved in battle. Because of the somewhat distant battle location, both sides were forced to fight on little sleep. Another Roman disadvantage was thirst caused by Hannibal’s attack on the Roman encampment during the previous day. Furthermore, the massive number of troops would have led to an overwhelming amount of background noise. All of these psychological factors made battle especially difficult for the infantrymen.^[57]

The light infantry on both sides engaged in indecisive skirmishing, inflicting few casualties and quickly withdrawing through the ranks of their heavy infantry.^[58] As the Roman heavy infantry attacked, Hannibal stood with his men in the weak center and held them together in a controlled retreat. The crescent of Hispanic and Gallic troops buckled inwards as they gradually withdrew step by step. Knowing the superiority of the Roman infantry, Hannibal had instructed his infantry to withdraw deliberately, creating an even tighter semicircle around the attacking Roman forces. By doing so, he had turned the strength of the Roman infantry into a weakness. While the front ranks were gradually advancing, the bulk of the Roman troops began to lose their cohesion, as troops from the reserve lines advanced into the growing gaps.^[59] Soon they were compacted together so closely that they had little space to wield their weapons. In pressing so far forward in their desire to destroy the retreating and seemingly collapsing line of Hispanic and Gallic troops, the Romans had ignored (possibly due to the dust) the African troops that stood uncommitted on the projecting ends of this now-reversed crescent.^[52] This also gave the Carthaginian cavalry time to drive the Roman cavalry off on both flanks and attack the Roman center in the rear. The Roman infantry, now stripped of protection on both its flanks, formed a wedge that drove deeper and deeper into the Carthaginian semicircle, driving itself into an alley formed by the African infantry on the wings.^[60] At this decisive point, Hannibal ordered his African infantry to turn inwards and advance against the Roman flanks, creating an encirclement in one of the earliest known examples of a pincer movement.^[61]

When the Carthaginian cavalry attacked the Romans in the rear and the African flanking echelons assailed them on their right and left, the advance of the Roman infantry was brought to an abrupt halt.^[62] The Romans were henceforth enclosed in a pocket with no means of escape.^[63] The Carthaginians created a wall and began to systematically massacre them. Polybius wrote: « as their outer ranks were continually cut down, and the survivors forced to pull back and huddle together, they were finally all killed where they stood. »^[64]

As Livy described, « So many thousands of Romans were dying… Some, whom their wounds, pinched by the morning cold, had roused, as they were rising up, covered with blood, from the midst of the heaps of slain, were overpowered by the enemy. Some were found with their heads plunged into the earth, which they had excavated; having thus, as it appeared, made pits for themselves, and having suffocated themselves. »^[65] Victor Davis Hanson claims that nearly six hundred legionaries were slaughtered each minute until darkness brought an end to the bloodletting.^[66] Only 14,000 Roman troops managed to escape, most of whom had cut their way through to the nearby town of Canusium.

Roman

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

The Death of Aemilius Paullus by John Trumbull, 1773

Polybius writes that of the Roman and allied infantry, 70,000 were killed, 10,000 captured, and « perhaps » 3,000 survived. He also reports that of the 6,000 Roman and allied cavalry, only 370 survived.^[67]

Livy wrote, « Forty-five thousand and five hundred foot, two thousand seven hundred horse, there being an equal number of citizens and allies, are said to have been slain. »^[68] He also reports that 3,000 Roman and allied infantry and 1,500 Roman and allied cavalry were taken prisoner by the Carthaginians.^[68] Another 2,000 Roman fugitives were rounded up at the unfortified village of Cannae by Carthaginian cavalry commanded by Carthalo, 7,000 fell prisoner in the smaller Roman camp and 5,800 in the larger.^[68] Although Livy does not cite his source by name, it is likely to have been Quintus Fabius Pictor, a Roman historian who fought in and wrote on the Second Punic War. It is Pictor whom Livy names when reporting the casualties at the Battle of Trebia.^[69] In addition to the consul Paullus, Livy goes on to record that among the dead were 2 quaestors, 29 of the 48 military tribunes (some of consular rank, including the consul of the previous year, Gnaeus Servilius Geminus, and the former Magister equitum, Marcus Minucius Rufus), and 80 « senators or men who had held offices which would have given them the right to be elected to the Senate ».^[68]

Later Roman and Greco-Roman historians largely follow Livy’s figures. Appian gave 50,000 killed and « a great many » taken prisoner.^[70]Plutarch agreed, « 50,000 Romans fell in that battle… 4,000 were taken alive ».^[71] Quintilian: « 60,000 men were slain by Hannibal at Cannae ».^[72] Eutropius: « 20 officers of consular and praetorian rank, 30 senators, and 300 others of noble descent, were taken or slain, as well as 40,000 foot-soldiers, and 3,500 horse ».^[73]

Some modern historians, while rejecting Polybius’s figure as flawed, are willing to accept Livy’s figure.^[74] Other historians have come up with far lower estimates. In 1891, Cantalupi proposed Roman losses of 10,500 to 16,000.^[75] Samuels in 1990 also regarded Livy’s figure as far too high, on the grounds that the cavalry would have been inadequate to prevent the Roman infantry escaping to the rear. He doubts that Hannibal even wanted a high death toll, as much of the army consisted of Italians whom Hannibal hoped to win as allies.^[76]

Carthaginian

Livy recorded Hannibal’s losses at « about 8,000 of his bravest men. »^[77] Polybius reports 5,700 dead: 4,000 Gauls, 1,500 Spanish and Africans, and 200 cavalry.^[67]

Aftermath

 Second Punic War

Never when the city was in safety was there so great a panic and confusion within the walls of Rome. I shall therefore shrink from the task, and not attempt to relate what in describing I must make less than the reality. The consul and his army having been lost at the Trasimenus the year before, it was not one wound upon another which was announced, but a multiplied disaster, the loss of two consular armies, together with the two consuls: and that now there was neither any Roman camp, nor general nor soldiery: that Apulia and Samnium, and now almost the whole of Italy, were in the possession of Hannibal. No other nation surely would not have been overwhelmed by such an accumulation of misfortune.

— Livy, on the Roman Senate’s reaction to the defeat^[78]

For a brief period, the Romans were in complete disarray. Their best armies in the peninsula were destroyed, the few remnants severely demoralized, and the only remaining consul (Varro) completely discredited. As the story goes, Rome declared a national day of mourning as there was not a single person who was not either related to or acquainted with a person who had died. The Romans became so desperate that they resorted to human sacrifice, twice burying people alive^[79] at the Forum of Rome and abandoning an oversized baby in the Adriatic Sea^[79] (perhaps one of the last instances of human sacrifices by the Romans, apart from public executions of defeated enemies dedicated to Mars).

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

Philip V of Macedon pledged his support to Hannibal following the Carthaginian victory.

Within just three campaign seasons (20 months), Rome had lost one-fifth (150,000) of the entire population of male citizens over 17 years of age.^[80]Furthermore, the morale effect of this victory was such that most of southern Italy joined Hannibal’s cause. After Cannae, the Hellenistic southern provinces of Arpi, Salapia, Herdonia, Uzentum, including the cities of Capua and Tarentum (two of the largest city-states in Italy) revoked their allegiance to Rome and pledged their loyalty to Hannibal. As Livy noted, « How much more serious was the defeat of Cannae than those which preceded it, can be seen by the behavior of Rome’s allies; before that fateful day, their loyalty remained unshaken, now it began to waver for the simple reason that they despaired of Roman power. »^[81] That the same year the Greek cities in Sicily were induced to revolt against Roman political control, while the Macedonian king, Philip V, pledged his support to Hannibal, initiating the First Macedonian War against Rome. Hannibal also secured an alliance with the new King Hieronymus of Syracuse, the only independent king left in Sicily.

Hannibal counting the signet rings of the Roman knights killed during the battle, statue by Sébastien Slodtz, 1704, Louvre

Livy illustrates the state of Roman morale with two vivid anecdotes. The first concerns Hannibal’s brother Mago, who had returned to Carthage with news of the victory. He reported to their senate that in several engagements with the Romans Hannibal had killed over 200,000 soldier and taken 50,000 prisoner; of six commanders, two consuls and a Master of horse had been slain; and a number of Roman allies had gone over to the Carthaginians. Then Mago concluded his report by having a collection of golden rings poured upon the council floor in front of the assembled senators. He explained that each ring belonged to one equiteswho had been slain in battle and had earned the ring through exceptional bravery. Livy notes one unnamed authority stated the volume of jewelry amounted to three and one-half measures (Congius?), only to add « it is generally and more credibly held that there was not more than one measure of them.^[82]

The second concerns Lucius Caecilius Metellus and three other military tribunes, who had taken refuge at Canusium with other Roman refugees. Demoralized at the defeat, they discussed the possibility of setting sail overseas and finding employment as mercenaries for some foreign prince. Word of this meeting reached the young Publius Cornelius Scipio who, with only a few followers, strode to where the discussion was underway and burst into the chamber holding his naked sword over their heads. Before the wavering men Scipio is reported to have cried,

I swear with all the passion in my heart that I will never desert our homeland, or permit any other citizen of Rome to leave her in the lurch. If I willfully break my oath may Jupiter, Greatest and Best, bring me to a shameful death, with my house, my family, and all I possess! Swear the same oath, Caecilius! And the rest of you, swear it too. If anyone refuse, against him this sword is drawn.^[83]

Following the battle, the commander of the Numidian cavalry, Maharbal, urged Hannibal to seize the opportunity and march immediately on Rome. It is told that the latter’s refusal caused Maharbal’s exclamation: « Of a truth the gods have not bestowed all things upon the same person. You know how to conquer, Hannibal; but you do not know how to make use of your victory. »^[65] Hannibal had good reasons to judge the strategic situation after the battle differently from Maharbal. As the historian Hans Delbrück pointed out, due to the high numbers of killed and wounded among its ranks, the Punic army was not in a condition to perform a direct assault on Rome. It would have been a fruitless demonstration that would have nullified the psychological effect of Cannae on the Roman allies. Even if his army was at full strength, a successful siege of Rome would have required Hannibal to subdue a considerable part of the hinterland to cut the enemy’s supplies and secure his own. Even after the tremendous losses suffered at Cannae and the defection of a number of her allies, Rome still had abundant manpower to prevent this and maintain considerable forces in Iberia, Sicily, Sardinia and elsewhere despite Hannibal’s presence in Italy.^[84] Hannibal’s conduct after the victories at Trasimene (217 BC) and Cannae, and the fact that he first attacked Rome only five years later, in 211 BC, suggests that his strategic aim was not the destruction of his foe but to dishearten the Romans by carnage on the battlefield and to wear them down to a moderate peace agreement by stripping them of their allies.^[85][86][87]

Immediately after Cannae, Hannibal sent a delegation led by Carthaloto negotiate a peace treaty with the Senate on moderate terms. Despite the multiple catastrophes Rome had suffered, the Senate refused to parley. Instead, they redoubled their efforts, declaring full mobilization of the male Roman population, and raised new legions, enlisting landless peasants and even slaves.^[88] So firm were these measures that the word « peace » was prohibited, mourning was limited to only 30 days, and public tears were prohibited even to women.^[42]:386 For the remainder of the war in Italy, they did not amass such large forces under one command against Hannibal; they used several independent armies, still outnumbering the Punic forces in numbers of armies and soldiers. The war still had occasional battles, but was focused on taking strongpoints and constant fighting according to the Fabian strategy. This finally forced Hannibal with his shortage of manpower to retreat to Croton from where he was called to Africa for the battle of Zama, ending the war with a complete Roman victory.^{[citation needed]}

Effects on Roman military doctrine

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

Shield of Henry II of France depicting Hannibal’s victory at Cannae, an allusion to France’s conflict with the Holy Roman Empire during the 16th century.

Cannae played a major role in shaping the military structure and tactical organization of the Roman Republican army. At Cannae, the Roman infantry assumed a formation similar to the Greek phalanx. This left them vulnerable to Hannibal’s tactic of double envelopment since their inability to maneuver independently from the mass of the army made it impossible for them to counter the strategic encirclement used by the Carthaginian cavalry. The laws of the Roman state requiring command to alternate between the two consuls restricted strategic consistency.^{[citation needed]}

In the years following Cannae, striking reforms were introduced to address these deficiencies. First, the Romans « articulated the phalanx, then divided it into columns, and finally split it up into a great number of small tactical bodies that were capable, now of closing together in a compact impenetrable union, now of changing the pattern with consummate flexibility, of separating one from the other and turning in this or that direction. »^[89] For instance, at Ilipa and Zama, the principeswere formed up well to the rear of the hastati—a deployment that allowed a greater degree of mobility and maneuverability. The culminating result of this change marked the transition from the traditional manipular system to the cohort under Gaius Marius, as the basic infantry unit of the Roman army.^{[citation needed]}

In addition, a unified command came to be seen as a necessity. After various political experiments, Scipio Africanus was made general-in-chief of the Roman armies in Africa, and was assured this role for the duration of the war. This appointment may have violated the constitutional laws of the Roman Republic but, as Delbrück wrote, it « effected an internal transformation that increased her military potentiality enormously » while foreshadowing the decline of the Republic’s political institutions. Furthermore, the battle exposed the limits of a citizen-militia army. Following Cannae, the Roman army gradually developed into a professional force: the nucleus of Scipio’s army at Zama was composed of veterans who had been fighting the Carthaginians in Hispania for nearly sixteen years, and had been moulded into a superb fighting force.^{[citation needed]}

Status in military history

Cannae is as famous for Hannibal’s tactics as it is for the role it played in Roman history. Not only did Hannibal inflict a defeat on the Roman Republic in a manner unrepeated for over a century until the lesser-known Battle of Arausio, the battle has acquired a significant reputation in military history. As military historian Theodore Ayrault Dodge wrote:

Few battles of ancient times are more marked by ability… than the battle of Cannae. The position was such as to place every advantage on Hannibal’s side. The manner in which the far from perfect Hispanic and Gallic foot was advanced in a wedge in echelon… was first held there and then withdrawn step by step, until it had the reached the converse position… is a simple masterpiece of battle tactics. The advance at the proper moment of the African infantry, and its wheel right and left upon the flanks of the disordered and crowded Roman legionaries, is far beyond praise. The whole battle, from the Carthaginian standpoint, is a consummate piece of art, having no superior, few equal, examples in the history of war.^[90]

As Will Durant wrote, « It was a supreme example of generalship, never bettered in history… and it set the lines of military tactics for 2,000 years ».^[91]

Hannibal’s double envelopment at Cannae is often viewed as one of the greatest battlefield maneuvers in history, and is cited as the first successful use of the pincer movement within the Western world to be recorded in detail.^[92]

« Cannae Model »

Apart from being one of the greatest defeats inflicted on Roman arms, Cannae represents the archetypal battle of annihilation, a strategy whose successful implementation has been rare in modern history. As Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in World War II, wrote, « Every ground commander seeks the battle of annihilation; so far as conditions permit, he tries to duplicate in modern war the classic example of Cannae ». Furthermore, the totality of Hannibal’s victory has made the name « Cannae » a byword for military success, and is studied in detail in military academies around the world. The notion that an entire army could be encircled and annihilated within a single stroke led to a fascination among Western generals for centuries (including Frederick the Greatand Helmuth von Moltke), who attempted to emulate its tactical paradigm of envelopment and re-create their own « Cannae ».^[66]Delbrück’s seminal study of the battle had a profound influence on German military theorists, in particular the Chief of the German General Staff, Alfred von Schlieffen, whose eponymous « Schlieffen Plan » was inspired by Hannibal’s double envelopment maneuver. Schlieffen taught that the « Cannae model » would continue to be applicable in maneuver warfare throughout the 20th century:

A battle of annihilation can be carried out today according to the same plan devised by Hannibal in long forgotten times. The enemy front is not the goal of the principal attack. The mass of the troops and the reserves should not be concentrated against the enemy front; the essential is that the flanks be crushed. The wings should not be sought at the advanced points of the front but rather along the entire depth and extension of the enemy formation. The annihilation is completed through an attack against the enemy’s rear… To bring about a decisive and annihilating victory requires an attack against the front and against one or both flanks…

Schlieffen later developed his own operational doctrine in a series of articles, many of which were translated and published in a work entitled Cannae.^{[citation needed]}

In 1991, general Norman Schwarzkopf Jr., commander of Coalition forces in the Gulf War, cited Hannibal’s triumph at Cannae as inspiration for the rapid and successful Coalition operations during the conflict.^[93]

Historical sources

Giacobbe Giusti, Battle of Cannae

Medieval representation of the battle of Cannae

There are three main accounts of the battle, none of them contemporary. The closest is Polybius, who wrote his account 50 years after the battle. Livy wrote in the time of Augustus, and Appian later still. Appian’s account describes events that have no relation with those of Livy and Polybius.^[94] Polybius portrays the battle as the ultimate nadir of Roman fortunes, functioning as a literary device such that the subsequent Roman recovery is more dramatic. For example, some argue that his casualty figures are exaggerated— »more symbolic than factual ».^[95] Livy portrays the Senate in the role of hero and hence assigns blame for the Roman defeat to the low-born Varro. Blaming Varro also serves to lift blame from the Roman soldiers, whom Livy has a tendency to idealize.^[96] Scholars tend to discount Appian’s account. The verdict of Philip Sabin— »a worthless farrago »—is typical.^[97]

Historian Martin Samuels has questioned whether it was in fact Varro in command on the day on the grounds that Paullus may have been in command on the right. The warm reception that Varro received after the battle from the Senate was in striking contrast to the savage criticism meted out to other commanders. Samuels doubts whether Varro would have been received with such warmth had he been in command.^[98] Gregory Daly notes that, in the Roman military, the right was always the place of command. He suggests that at the Battle of Zama Hannibal was quoted saying that he had fought Paullus at Cannae and concludes that it is impossible to be sure who was in command on the day.^[99]

Notes

1. ^ Although some authors state the result was a decisive victory for Carthage, the majority of authors do not apply this label to the result.
2. ^ See Traditional English pronunciation of Latin

References

1. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 159.
2. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 28.
3. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 33.
4. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, pp. 36–37.
5. ^ Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.8
6. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 38.
7. ^ Liddell Hart, Basil. Strategy. New York City, New York: Penguin, 1967.
8. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxi.19
9. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 40.
10. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 60.
11. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f g} Polybius, Historiae (« The Histories »), iii.107; translated by Evelyn S. Shuckburgh, taken from « Internet Ancient History Sourcebook ». Fordham University website.
12. ^ Polybius, Historiae, i.16
13. ^ Jump up to:^a b Polybius, Historiae, iii.107
14. ^ The Cambridge Ancient History VIII: Rome and the Mediterranean 218–133 BC, Cambridge University Press, 1965.
15. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.36
16. ^ Jump up to:^a b Daly 2002, p. 119.
17. ^ Daly 2002, pp. 119–120.
18. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 75.
19. ^ Jump up to:^a b Goldsworthy 2001, p. 77.
20. ^ Jump up to:^a b Goldsworthy 2001, p. 80.
21. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 81.
22. ^ Cottrell, Leonard. Enemy of Rome. Evans Bros, 1965, ISBN 0-237-44320-1. p94
23. ^ Jump up to:^a b Goldsworthy 2001, p. 82.
24. ^ Caven, B. Punic Wars. London: George Werdenfeld and Nicholson Ltd., 1980.
25. ^ Plutarch, Parallel Lives, « Fabius Maximus ».
26. ^ Macrobius, Saturnalia, 1.1.6.26
27. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, XLIV.37.8
28. ^ Derow, « The Roman Calendar, 218-191 B.C. », Phoenix, 30 (1976), pp. 277f
29. ^ Daly 2002, p. 32.
30. ^ Daly 2002, pp. 29–32.
31. ^ Daly 2002, pp. 81–112.
32. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 44.
33. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e} Goldsworthy 2001, p. 54.
34. ^ Jump up to:^a b Polybius, Historiae, iii.114
35. ^ Daly 2002, pp. 107–108.
36. ^ Jump up to:^a b Duncan Head, Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars(Wargames Research Group, 1983) p. 144.
37. ^ Jump up to:^a b Daly 2002, p. 89.
38. ^ Daly 2002, p. 90.
39. ^ Connolly (1998), p. 148.
40. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 100.
41. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 102.
42. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Dodge, Theodore. Hannibal. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Da Capo Press (reprint edition), 1891, ISBN 0-306-81362-9.
43. ^ Mills, Cliff. Hannibal. New York: Chelsea House, 2008. Print.
44. ^ Cottrell, Leonard. Enemy of Rome. Evans Bros, 1965, ISBN 0-237-44320-1. p95
45. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 110.
46. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, pp. 110–111.
47. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Goldsworthy 2001, p. 112.
48. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 108.
49. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, pp. 111–112.
50. ^ Bradford, E. Hannibal. London: Macmillan London Ltd., 1981.
51. ^ Healy 1994, p. 77.
52. ^ Jump up to:^a b Healy 1994, p. 84.
53. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, pp. 118–120.
54. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 120.
55. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Goldsworthy 2001, p. 126.
56. ^ Jump up to:^a b Goldsworthy 2001, p. 149.
57. ^ Daly 2002.
58. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, pp. 114–116.
59. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 147.
60. ^ Cottrell, Leonard. Enemy of Rome. Evans Bros, 1965, ISBN 0-237-44320-1. p99
61. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 148.
62. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 150.
63. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 152.
64. ^ Healy 1994, p. 85.
65. ^ Jump up to:^a b Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.51
66. ^ Jump up to:^a b Hanson, « Battle of Cannae » The Reader’s Companion to Military History, Cowley, Robert and Parker, Geoffrey (edd.), p. 70. Houghton Mifflin Company, 1996, ISBN 0-395-66969-3.
67. ^ Jump up to:^a b Polybius, Historiae, iii.117
68. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.49
69. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.7
70. ^ Appian 1999, 4.25.
71. ^ Plutarch 1916, 16.8.
72. ^ Quintilian. Institutio Oratoria, 8.6.26.
73. ^ Eutropius. Abridgement of Roman History, iii.10.
74. ^ Daly 2002, p. 202.
75. ^ Cantalupi, P. « Le Legioni Romane nella Guerra d’Annibale », Beloch Studi di Storia Antica.
76. ^ Samuels 1990, p. 25.
77. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.52.6
78. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.54
79. ^ Jump up to:^a b Palmer, Robert EA (1997). Rome and Carthage at peace. Stuttgart, F. Steiner. ISBN 978-3-515-07040-9.
80. ^ Cottrell, Leonard. Enemy of Rome. Evans Bros, 1965, ISBN 0-237-44320-1. p102
81. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.61
82. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxiii.11-12
83. ^ Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, xxii.53
84. ^ Delbrück 1964, pp. 353–354.
85. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, pp. 162–163.
86. ^ Delbrück 1964, pp. 354–355.
87. ^ Delbrück 1964, pp. 384–385.
88. ^ Cottrell, Leonard. Enemy of Rome. Evans Bros, 1965, ISBN 0-237-44320-1. p104
89. ^ Peter Paret, Gordon A. Craig, Felix Gilbert, Makers of Modern Strategy from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1986), page 337.
90. ^ Theodore Ayrault Dodge, Hannibal (N.Y., N.Y.: Perseus Publishing, 2004), pages 378–379.
91. ^ Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, vol. III (N.Y., N.Y.: Simon and Schuster, 1944), page 51.
92. ^ O’Neill, Timothy R. « Reconnaissance on the Rappahannock Field Manual » (PDF). p. 65. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 30, 2015. Retrieved July 4, 2013.
93. ^ Goldsworthy 2001, p. 180.
94. ^ Daly 2002, pp. 17–18.
95. ^ Daly 2002, pp. 21–23.
96. ^ Daly 2002, pp. 24–25.
97. ^ Sabin, Philip. Lost Battles, p. 183.
98. ^ Samuels 1990, p. 23.
99. ^ Daly 2002, p. 120.

Bibliography

Ancient sources

• Appian (1999). « Hannibalic War ». Perseus Digital Library.
• Titus Livius (Livy), Ab Urbe Condita, translation by Cannon Roberts.
• Plutarch (1916). « Life of Fabius Maximus ». Loeb Classical Library.
• Polybius, The Histories, translation by W. R. Paton.

Modern sources

• Astin, A. E. (ed) The Cambridge Ancient History, 2nd edition, Volume VIII. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006, ISBN 0-521-23448-4
• Carlton, James. The Military Quotation Book. New York City, New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2002.
• Daly, Gregory (2002). Cannae: The Experience of Battle in the Second Punic War. London/New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-32743-5.
• Delbrück, Hans (1964) [1920]. Geschichte der Kriegskunst im Rahmen der politischen Geschichte (I Teil: Das Altertum) (in German). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.
• Goldsworthy, Adrian (2001). Cannae. London: Cassell & Co. ISBN 0304357146.
• Healy, Mark (1994). « Cannae: Hannibal Smashes Rome’s Army ». Sterling Heights: Osprey. ISBN 978-1855324701.
• Hoyos, Dexter B. Hannibal: Rome’s Greatest Enemy. Bristol Phoenix Press, 2005, ISBN 1-904675-46-8 (hbk) ISBN 1-904675-47-6 (pbk).
• Lazenby, John Francis (1998) [1978]. Hannibal’s War: A Military History of the Second Punic War. Wilts: University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN 978-0806130040.
• O’Connell, Robert L. The Ghosts of Cannae: Hannibal and the Darkest Hour of the Roman republic. New York: Random House, 2010. ISBN 9781400067022
• Samuels, Martin. (1 June 1990). « The Reality of Cannae ». Militärgeschichtliche Zeitschrift. 47 (1): 7–32.
• Talbert, Richard J. A. (ed.) Atlas of Classical History. London/New York: Routledge, 1985, ISBN 0-415-03463-9.

• Cannae – a treatise by General Fieldmarshal Count Alfred von Schlieffen
• Battle At Cannae Mommsen History of Rome. Book 03 From the Union of Italy to the Subjugation of Carthage and the Greek States. Page 50
• Archelogical site thought as the battlesite

hide v t e Punic Wars
First Punic War	Messana Agrigentum Lipari Islands Mylae Thermae Sulci Tyndaris Cape Ecnomus Aspis Adys Bagradas (Tunis) Cape Hermaeum Panormus Drepana Lilybaeum Drepana (siege) Mount Ercte 1st Mt. Eryx 2nd Mt. Eryx Aegates
Mercenary War	Utica Bagradas Hamilcar’s victory with Naravas Carthage « The Saw » Tunis
Second Punic War	Saguntum Crossing of the Alps Lilybaeum Rhone Cissa Ticinus Trebia Ebro River Lake Trasimene Ager Falernus Geronium Cannae Silva Litana 1st Nola Dertosa 2nd Nola Decimomannu 3rd Nola 1st Beneventum Syracuse 1st Tarentum 2nd Beneventum 1st Capua Silarus 1st Herdonia Upper Baetis 2nd Capua 2nd Herdonia Numistro Canusium 2nd Tarentum New Carthage Baecula Petelia Grumentum Metaurus Ilipa Sucro Guadalquivir Carteia Crotona 1st Utica 2nd Utica Great Plains (Bagradas) Cirta Insubria Zama
Third Punic War	Lake Tunis 1st Nepheris Port of Carthage 2nd Nepheris Carthage

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

 

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

 

 

Roman Theatre of Orange

UNESCO World Heritage site Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France
Location	Orange, Vaucluse, France
Part of	Roman Theatre and its Surroundings and the « Triumphal Arch » of Orange
Criteria	Cultural: (iii), (iv)
Reference	163bis-001
Inscription	1981 (5th Session)
Extensions	2007
Area	9.41 ha (23.3 acres)
Buffer zone	116 ha (290 acres)
Website	www.culturespaces.com/en/orange
Coordinates	44°8′8.6″N 4°48′30.3″ECoordinates: 44°8′8.6″N 4°48′30.3″E
Location of Roman Theatre of Orange in Vaucluse Show map of VaucluseShow map of FranceShow all

The Roman Theatre of Orange (French: Théâtre antique d’Orange) is a Roman theatre in Orange, Vaucluse, France. It was built early in the 1st century AD. The structure is owned by the municipality of Orange and is the home of the summer operafestival, the Chorégies d’Orange.

It is one of the best preserved of all Roman theatres, and served the Roman colony of Arausio (or, more specifically, Colonia Julia Firma Secundanorum Arausio: « the Julian colony of Arausio established by the soldiers of the second legion ») which was founded in 40 BC. Playing a major role in the life of the citizens, who spent a large part of their free time there, the theatre was seen by the Roman authorities not only as a means of spreading Roman culture to the colonies, but also as a way of distracting them from all political activities.

Mime, pantomime, poetry readings and the « attelana » (a kind of farce rather like the commedia dell’arte) was the dominant form of entertainment, much of which lasted all day. For the common people, who were fond of spectacular effects, magnificent stage sets became very important, as was the use of stage machinery. The entertainment offered was open to all and free of charge.

As the Western Roman Empire declined during the 4th century, by which time Christianity had become the official religion, the theatre was closed by official edict in AD 391, since the Church opposed what it regarded as uncivilized spectacles. After that, the theatre was abandoned completely. It was probably pillaged by the Visigoths in 412, and like most Roman buildings was certainly stripped of its better stone over the centuries for reuse. It was used as a defensive post in the Middle Ages. During the 16th-century religious wars, it became a refuge for the townspeople.

Construction and Structure of the Theatre

Giacobbe Giusti, Roman Theatre of Orange, France

The Orange theatre is one of few Roman theatres which still retains the Scaenae frons, at the rear of the stage, though stripped of its elaborate decoration.

Early Roman theatre were mostly constructed from wood and meant to be temporary structures. In 55BC Pompey had a stone theatre built in his home city of Rome, and thereafter grand (and permanent) Roman theatres spread widely.^[1] The Orange theatre was created under the rule of Augustus, and is believed to be one of the first of its kind in this area of modern-day France. One of the most iconic parts of this structure is the grand exterior facade, which measures to be 103 meters long and 37 meters high.^[2] Originally, there was a wooden roof across the theatre to protect the audience from unfavorable weather conditions. There is evidence on the walls that shows that, at some point, the roof was destroyed in a fire.^[2] Although it is relatively sparse in decoration and embellishment, the three story wall gives an overwhelmingly powerful appearance to the entire building. The main three doors on the first level of the facade open directly onto the stage inside the theatre, which can seat from 5,800 up to 7,300 (today, much of the seating has been reconstructed to ensure the safety of tourists and audience members).^[2]

The stage, which is 61 meters long and raised about one meter from the ground, is backed by a 37 meter high wall whose height has been preserved completely.^[2] This wall is vital to the theatre, as it helped to project sound to the large audience. The wall, also known as the scaenae frons, is the only architecturaly decorated surface throughout the entire theatre. It originally was embellished with marble mosaics of many different colors, multiple columns and friezes, and statues placed in niches.^[1] The central niche contains a 3.5 meter high statue of the emperor Augustus, although this was most likely a restoration of an original statue of Apollo, the god of music and the arts.^[1] The central door, below the niche containing this statue, is called the Royal Door, or valva regia. This door was used only by the most important, principle actors to enter and exit the stage. Above the door was a frieze decorated with centaurs, which is no longer there but is instead on display across the street in the Orange Museum (unfortunately only remains are left). The stage was covered with a modern platform when the theatre began to be used again for operas and other performances.^[2]

Reconstruction

Reconstruction of the Théâtre d’Orange began in 1825 with the intent of returning the theatre to its original purpose: to host large, exciting performances. In 1869, while still in the process of being restored, the theatre hosted “The Roman Festivals”, which brought over 10,000 guests.^{[citation needed]} A very important part of the restoration was excavating the area around the theatre, which occurred in the 1930s. This excavation and leveling of surrounding buildings uncovered many historical objects and artifacts that furthered knowledge about the history and uses of the structure.^[1] Today, all three levels of seating have been completely restored, along with many staircases, major parts of the pavement, the stage, the orchestra, and parts of walls.^[2]

Current uses of the Theatre

During the Renaissance, around the 12th century, the Théâtre d’Orange was used by the church and play companies to host performances. In the 16th century this tradition stopped once again when the town was sacked during The French Wars of Religion. Much of the population left, and it took until the 19th century for the theatre to be returned to its original purpose. Today, the Théâtre d’Orange is considered the best preserved Roman theatre in all of Europe. It is managed by Culturespaces, an organization that also manages other related cultural sites in the area, such as the Orange Museumand the Triumphal Arch, among other sites in the South of France. This great effort of preservation allows it to be used not just as a historical site but also as a venue for concerts and theatrical performances. The first major festival held in the theatre in 1869 after the restoration began was called “The Roman Festival”. This festival developed into an annual festival called the Chorégies (see below). These decadent, multimedia events attract thousands of visitors from around the world. During the rest of the year, the Théâtre d’Orange is a major tourist attraction. Tourists can walk through the main theatre and surrounding rooms and corridors while being led by an audio guide.

The « Roman Festival » and the Chorégies

A performance at the 2007 Chorégies festival

During the 19th century the theatre slowly began to recover its original splendour, due to the efforts of Prosper Mérimée, who then held the position of director of « Monuments Historiques ». Under his direction, restoration work began in 1825 and in 1869 the theatre became the home of a « Roman Festival » which celebrated the glory of Rome and included a performance of Méhul‘s opera, Joseph. In the latter part of the century, all the major players of the French classical stage appeared in the Orange festivals, including Sarah Bernhardt who played « Phèdre » in 1903.

By the end of the century, the tiered seats were restored, a reflection of the bureaucratic process. In 1902 the festival was given a new name, the « Chorégies, » planned as an annual summer festival. The name comes from the tax that was imposed on wealthy Romans to pay for theatrical productions. Until 1969 the Chorégies consisted of plays, alternating with musical works, opera and symphonies. However, after that date, Orange became solely an opera festival and theatrical works were performed at Avignon.

In 1981 UNESCO declared the theatre as a World Heritage Site.

Gallery

• 

  Seating in the theatre
• 

  The centaur frieze
• 

  The new stage roof
• 

  Roman Theatre with new stage roof
• 

  The French Foreign Legion celebrating Camerone Day in the Roman Theatre of Orange

• List of opera festivals

References

1. ^ Jump up to:^a b c d « Arausio.(Orange).Theatre.Commentary ». http://www.whitman.edu. Retrieved 2015-11-11.
2. ^ Jump up to:^{a b c d e f} « The Roman Theatre of Orange ». Théâtre Antique & Musée d’Orange. Retrieved 2015-11-11.

• Official website
• « Les Chorégies d’Orange ». Les Chorégies d’Orange. Retrieved 2015-11-06. Les Choregies d’Orange

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Theatre_of_Orange

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

So-called “Apoxyomenos” (“the Scraper”). Marble, Roman copy of the 1st century AD after a Greek bronze original ca. 320 BC. From the Trastevere in Roma.

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Athena-Marsyas-Gruppe, Rom, Museo Gregoriano Profano

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

L’Amazone Mattei est la meilleure copie existante d’un original perdu en bronze de Phidias, réalisé dans la seconde moitié du cinquième siècle av. J.C.

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Cnidus Aphrodite. Marble, Roman copy after a Greek original of the 4th century. Marble; original elements: torso and thighs; restored elements: head, arms, legs and support (drapery and jug).

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

The Apollo Belvedereor Apollo of the Belvedere

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Laocoön and His Sons

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Scène de l’Odyssée

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Attaque des Lestrygons

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Mosaic, Caracalla bath

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Athletenmosaike aus den Caracalla-Thermen

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

 

Stefaneschi Triptych

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Stefaneschi Altarpiece is a triptych by the Italian medieval painter Giotto, commissioned by Cardinal Giacomo Gaetani Stefaneschi^[1] to serve as an altarpiece for one of the altars of Old St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Annunciazione (Gentile da Fabriano)

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

 

The Perugia Altarpiece(Italian: Pala di Perugia) is a painting by the Italian early Renaissance painter Fra Angelico

 

Musei Vaticani Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums
Sculptures above the exits of museums
Location of the Vatican Museums within Vatican City
Wikimedia | © OpenStreetMap
Established	1506
Location	Vatican City
Coordinates	41°54′23″N 12°27′16″ECoordinates: 41°54′23″N 12°27′16″E
Type	Art museum
Visitors	6,427,277 (2017) [1]
Director	Barbara Jatta[2]
Website	Official website

The Vatican Museums, north of St. Peter’s Basilica

Part of a series on the
Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums
The New Wing, built by Raffaele Stern.
Artists[show]
Architects[show]
Architecture[show]
Paintings[show]
Sculptures[show]
Frescoes[show]
Artifacts[show]
Collections[show]
Catholicism portal  Vatican City portal
v t e

The Vatican Museums (Italian: Musei Vaticani; Latin: Musea Vaticana) are Christian and art museums located within the city boundaries of the Vatican City. They display works from the immense collection amassed by popesthroughout the centuries including several of the most renowned Roman sculptures and most important masterpieces of Renaissance art in the world. The museums contain roughly 70,000 works, of which 20,000 are on display,^[3] and currently employ 640 people who work in 40 different administrative, scholarly, and restoration departments.^[4]

Pope Julius II founded the museums in the early 16th century.^[5]The Sistine Chapel, with its ceiling decorated by Michelangelo and the Stanze di Raffaello decorated by Raphael, are on the visitor route through the Vatican Museums. In 2017, they were visited by 6 million people, which combined makes it the 5th most visited art museum in the world.^[6][7]

There are 54 galleries, or sale, in total,^{[citation needed]} with the Sistine Chapel, notably, being the very last sala within the Museum. It is one of the largest museums in the world.

In 2017, the Museum’s official website and social media presence was completely redone, in accord with current standards and appearances for modern websites.^[8]

History

The Vatican Museums trace their origin to one marble sculpture, purchased in the 16th century: Laocoön and His Sons was discovered on 14 January 1506, in a vineyard near the basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome. Pope Julius II sent Giuliano da Sangallo and Michelangelo Buonarroti, who were working at the Vatican, to examine the discovery. On their recommendation, the pope immediately purchased the sculpture from the vineyard owner. The pope put the sculpture, which depicts the Trojan priest Laocoön and his two sons being attacked by giant serpents, on public display at the Vatican exactly one month after its discovery.

Benedict XIV founded the Museum Christianum, and some of the Vatican collections formed the Lateran Museum, which Pius IXfounded by decree in 1854.^[9]

The Museums celebrated their 500th anniversary in October 2006 by permanently opening the excavations of a Vatican Hill necropolis to the public.^[10]

On 1 January 2017, Barbara Jatta became the Director of the Vatican Museums, replacing Antonio Paolucci who had been director since 2007.^[11][12]

Pinacoteca Vaticana

The art gallery was housed in the Borgia Apartment until Pope Pius XIordered construction of a proper building. The new building, designed by Luca Beltrami, was inaugurated on 27 October 1932.^[13] The museum has paintings including:

• Giotto‘s Stefaneschi Triptych
• Olivuccio di Ciccarello, Opere di Misericordia
• Raphael’s Madonna of Foligno, Oddi Altarpiece and Transfiguration
• Leonardo da Vinci‘s St. Jerome in the Wilderness
• Caravaggio‘s Entombment
• Perugino‘s Madonna and Child with Saints and San Francesco al Prato Resurrection
• Filippo Lippi‘s Marsuppini Coronation
• Jan Matejko‘s Sobieski at Vienna

Collection of Modern Religious Art

The Collection of Modern Religious Art was added in 1973 and houses paintings and sculptures from artists like Carlo Carrà, Giorgio de Chirico, Vincent van Gogh, Paul Gauguin, Marc Chagall, Paul Klee, Salvador Dalí, and Pablo Picasso.^[14]

Sculpture museums

The group of museums includes several sculpture museums surrounding the Cortile del Belvedere. These are the Gregoriano Profano Museum, with classical sculpture, and others as below:

Museo Pio-Clementino

The New Wing, Braccio Nuovobuilt by Raffaele Stern

The Prima Porta Augustus

A Roman naval bireme depicted in a relief from the Temple of Fortuna Primigenia in Praeneste(Palestrina),^[15] constructed c. 120 BC;^[16] exhibited in the Pius-Clementine Museum (Museo Pio-Clementino) of the Vatican.

The museum takes its name from two popes; Clement XIV, who established the museum, and Pius VI, the pope who brought the museum to completion. Clement XIV came up with the idea of creating a new museum in Innocent VIII‘s Belvedere Palace and started the refurbishment work.^[17]

Pope Clement XIV founded the Pio-Clementino museum in 1771, and originally it contained the Renaissance and antique works. The museum and collection were enlarged by Clement’s successor Pius VI. Today, the museum houses works of Greek and Roman sculpture. Some notable galleries are:

• Greek Cross Gallery: (Sala a Croce Greca): with the porphyri sarcophagi of Constance and Saint Helen, daughter and mother of Constantine the Great.
• Sala Rotonda: shaped like a miniature Pantheon, the room has impressive ancient mosaics on the floors, and ancient statues lining the perimeter, including a gilded bronze statue of Hercules.
• Gallery of the Statues(Galleria delle Statue): as its name implies, holds various important statues, including Sleeping Ariadneand the bust of Menander. It also contains the Barberini Candelabra.
• Gallery of the Busts (Galleria dei Busti): Many ancient busts are displayed.
• Cabinet of the Masks (Gabinetto delle Maschere): The name comes from the mosaic on the floor of the gallery, found in Villa Adriana, which shows ancient theater masks. Statues are displayed along the walls, including the Three Graces.
• Sala delle Muse: Houses the statue group of Apollo and the nine muses, uncovered in a Roman villa near Tivoli in 1774, as well as statues by important ancient Greek or Roman sculptors. The centerpiece is the Belvedere Torso, revered by Michelangelo and other Renaissance men.^[18]
• Sala degli Animali: So named because of the many ancient statues of animals.

Tourists in the Pinacoteca Vaticana

Museo Chiaramonti

This museum was founded in the early 19th century by Pope Pius VII, whose surname before his election as pope was Chiaramonti. The museum consists of a large arched gallery in which are exhibited several statues, sarcophagi and friezes. The New Wing, Braccio Nuovo, built by Raffaele Stern, houses statues including the Augustus of Prima Porta, the Doryphoros, and The River Nile. The Galeria Lapidaria forms part of the Museo Chiaramonti, and contains over 3,000 stone tablets and inscriptions. It is accessible only with special permission, usually for the purpose of academic study.

Museo Gregoriano Etrusco

Founded by Pope Gregory XVI in 1836, this museum has eight galleries and houses important Etruscan pieces, coming from archaeological excavations.^[19] The pieces include: vases, sarcophagus, bronzes and the Guglielmi Collection.

Museo Gregoriano Egiziano

This museum houses a large collection of artifacts from Ancient Egypt.^[20] Such material includes papyruses, the Grassi Collection, animal mummies, and reproductions of the Book of the Dead.^[21]

History

The Museo Gregoriano Egiziano was inaugurated on 2 February 1839 to commemorate the anniversary of Gregory XVI’s accession to the papacy. The creation of the Museo Gregoriano Egiziano was particularly close to the pope’s heart as he believed the understanding of ancient Egyptian civilisation was vital in terms of its scientific importance as well as its value in understanding the Old Testament. This feeling was expressed in a paper by the museum’s first curator, the physiologist and Barnabite, Father Luigi Maria Ungarelli.^[17]

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

Statue of the Nile recumbent 1st-2nd Century AD, from Rome Museo Gregoriano Egiziano

Vatican Historical Museum

The Vatican Historical Museum (Italian: Museo storico vaticano) was founded in 1973 at the behest of Pope Paul VI,^[22] and was initially hosted in environments under the Square Garden. In 1987, it moved to the main floor of the Apostolic Palace of the Lateran where it opened in March 1991.

The Vatican Historical Museum has a unique collection of portraits of the Popes from the 16th century to date, the memorable items of the Papal Military Corps of the 16–17th centuries and old religious paraphernalia related to rituals of the papacy. Also on display on the lower floor are the papamobili (Popemobiles); carriages and motorcars of Popes and Cardinals, including the first cars used by Popes.^[23]

Highlights from the Painting Collection

Giacobbe Giusti, Vatican Museums

• 

  Leonardo da Vinci

  St. Jerome in Wilderness, 103 x 75 cm.

   

 

• 

  Giotto di Bondone
  Stefaneschi Triptych, 224 x 245 cm

   

 

• 

  Giovanni Bellini
  Pieta, 106 x 84 cm.

   

 

• 

  Raphael
  Oddi Altarpiece, 272 x 165 cm

   

 

• 

  Raphael
  Transfiguration, 405 x 278 cm.

   

   

• 

  Raphael
  Madonna of Foligno, 320 x 194 cm.

   

• 

  Titian
  Frari Madonna, 338 x 270 cm.

   

   

• 

  Caravaggio
  Entombment, 300 x 203 cm.

   

 

• 

  Veronese
  The Vision of St. Helen, 166 x 134 cm.

   

 

• 

  Correggio
  Christ in Glory, 105 x 98 cm.

   

 

• 

  Titian
  Portrait of Doge Marcello

   

 

• 

  Perugino
  Decemviri Altarpiece, 193 x 165 cm.

   

 

• 

  Raphael
  Adoration of the Magi
  27 x 50 cm.

   

 

• 

  Raphael
  Annunciation
  27 x 50 cm.

   

 

• 

  Raphael
  Presentation in the Temple
  27 x 50 cm.

Other Highlights in the Museum

Gallery of Maps

• The red marble papal throne, formerly in the Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano;
• Roman sculpture, tombstones, and inscriptions, including the Early Christian Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus and Dogmatic sarcophagus, and the epitaph of Lucius Cornelius Scipio Barbatus;
• The Raphael Rooms with many works by Raphael and his workshop, including the masterpiece The School of Athens
• The Niccoline Chapel
• The Sistine Chapel, including the Sistine Chapel ceiling.
• The Gallery of Maps: topographical maps of the whole of Italy, painted on the walls by friar Ignazio Danti of Perugia, commissioned by Pope Gregory XIII (1572–1585). It remains the world’s largest pictorial geographical study.
• The frescoes and other works in the Borgia Apartment built for Pope Alexander VI (Borgia).

Bramante Staircase; spiral stairs of the Vatican Museums, designed by Giuseppe Momo in 1932

• The Bramante Staircase, is a double spiral staircasedesigned by Giuseppe Momo in 1932. The staircase has two parts, a double helix, and is of shallow incline, being a stepped ramp rather than a true staircase. It is encircles the outer wall of a stairwell of approximately fifteen metres (49 feet) wide and with a clear space at the centre. The balustrade around the ramp is of ornately worked metal.

Visitors

The Museums had 6,427,277 visitors in 2017, making them the fourth-most-visited art museum in the world.^[1]

On the last Sunday of each month, the Vatican Museum is open to the public for free. It is popular and common for people to wait in line for many hours. The other days of the week tickets are available online or in-person. This image is a panoramic view of one small stretch of the entire queue on Sunday 29 April 2007, which continues for some distance in both directions beyond view.

Former entrance (now an exit) to the Vatican Museums, Vatican City

• Accademia, Venice
• Uffizi, Florence
• Index of Vatican City-related articles
• List of most visited art museums

References

1. ^ Jump up to:^a b The Art Newspaper Review, April 2018
2. Jump up^ Troszczynska, Katarzyna (1 January 2017). « To ona rządzi w Watykanie. Kim jest Barbara Jatta? » [Who is Barbara Jatta? She is the director of the Vatican] (in Polish). Virtual Poland. Retrieved 2017-08-29.
3. Jump up^ « Meet Antonio Paolucci ». Divento. Archived from the original on 2016-12-29. Retrieved 2016-12-28.
4. Jump up^ Jatta, Barbara (16 October 2016). « The Vatican Museums: transformation of an organisation » (PDF). Vatican Museums. Retrieved 29 August2017.
5. Jump up^ Bianchini, Riccardo (30 August 2017). « Vatican Museums – Rome ». Inexhibit. Retrieved 30 August 2017.
6. Jump up^ Top 100 Art Museum Attendance, The Art Newspaper, 2014. Retrieved on 13 July 2014.
7. Jump up^ « Museums and gallery visitors figure for 2017 ». Retrieved 18 March 2018.
8. Jump up^ « Conferenza Stampa di presentazione del nuovo sito web dei Musei Vaticani., 23.01.2017 »[Press Conference Presentation of the New Vatican Museum Website, 23.01.2017] (Press release) (in Italian). Holy See Press Office. Retrieved 29 August2017.
9. Jump up^  Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). « Christian Museums« . Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
10. Jump up^ McMahon, Barbara (10 October 2006). « Ancient Roman treasures found under Vatican car park ». The Guardian. Manchester. Retrieved 29 August 2017.
11. Jump up^ Glatz, Carol (20 December 2016). « Pope names first woman to head Vatican Museums ». The Catholic Herald. Retrieved 29 August 2017.
12. Jump up^ Rykner, Didier (7 December 2007). « Antonio Paolucci, the new Director of the Vatican Museums ». The Art Tribune. Retrieved 28 August 2017.
13. Jump up^ « Pinacoteca ». Vatican Museums. Retrieved 29 August 2017.
14. Jump up^ « The Vatican Museums ». Vatican City State. Retrieved 28 August 2017.
15. Jump up^ Saddington, D.B. (2011). « Classes: the Evolution of the Roman Imperial Fleets Plate 12.2 on p. 204 ». In Erdkamp, Paul. A Companion to the Roman Army. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 201–217. ISBN 978-1-4051-2153-8.
16. Jump up^ Coarelli, Filippo (1987). I Santuari del Lazio in età repubblicana [The Sanctuaries of Lazio in the Republican age] (in Italian). Carocci. pp. 35–84. (Subscription required (help)).
17. ^ Jump up to:^a b Bertoldi, Susanna (2011). The Vatican Museum: Discover the history, the works of art, the collections. Vatican City: Sillabe. pp. 46, 96. ISBN 978-88-8271-210-5.
18. Jump up^ Montebello, Philippe De; Kathleen Howard (1983). « Sala delle Muse ». The Vatican: Spirit and Art of Christian Rome. Metropolitan Museum of Art. pp. 178–180. ISBN 978-08-70993480.
19. Jump up^ « Museo Gregoriano Etrusco ». Vatican Museums. Retrieved 2014-08-21.
20. Jump up^ « Gregorian Egyptian Museum ». Vatican Museums. Retrieved 2014-08-21.
21. Jump up^ « Monuments exhibited in Room II of the Egyptian Museum ». Archived from the original on 5 July 2011.
22. Jump up^ Guide to the Vatican Museums and City. Musei Vaticani. 1986. ISBN 978-88-86921-11-4. Retrieved 9 May 2013.
23. Jump up^ « Museo Storico Vaticano (San Giovanni) ». Roma Capitale. Retrieved 28 August 2017.

Further reading

• G. Spinola, Il Museo Pio-Clementino (3 vols., 1996, 1999, 2004)
• G. B. Visconti and E. Q. Visconti, Il Museo Pio-Clementino Descritto (8 vols., 1782–1792)
• Daley, John (1982). The Vatican: spirit and art of Christian Rome. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art. ISBN 978-0810917118.
• Peter Rohrbacher: Völkerkunde und Afrikanistik für den Papst. Missionsexperten und der Vatikan 1922–1939 in: Römische Historische Mitteilungen 54 (2012), 583–610.

Vatican Museums.

• Official website 
• Vatican Museums official on-line ticket office
• Official English information

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_Museums

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Resurrection of Christ

by Hendrick van den Broeck

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

A reconstruction of the way the Sistine Chapel may have appeared from the exterior at the time of Michelangelo

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Trials of Moses by Botticelli

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Perugino: Wanderung Moses nach Ägypten

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Signorelli: Testament und Tod Mose

 

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

The Delivery of the Keys by Perugino

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Rosselli: Das letzte Abendmahl

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Michelangelo, volta della Cappella Sistina

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Michelangelo, lunetta, Jacob – Joseph

Lunetta di Giacobbe e Giuseppe (dettaglio)

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Michel-Ange — File:Lastjudgement.jpg

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Das Jüngste Gericht in der Sixtinischen Kapelle nach der Restaurierung

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Michel-Ange — File:Lastjudgement.jpg

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Michel-Ange — File:Lastjudgement.jpg

Le Jugement dernier (détail).
Le Christ et la Vierge.

Giacobbe Giusti, Sixtinische Kapelle

Ansicht der Sixtinischen Kapelle von der Kuppel des Petersdoms aus
Daten
Ort	Vatikanstadt
Baujahr	1475–1483
Höhe	21 m
Grundfläche	550 m²

Die Sixtinische Kapelle (italienischCappella Sistina) ist eine der Kapellen des Apostolischen Palastes. Sie ist der Ort, an dem das Konklaveabgehalten wird, und beherbergt einige der berühmtesten Gemäldeder Welt. Ihr Name bezieht sich auf Papst Sixtus IV., unter dem sie zwischen 1475 und 1483 erbaut wurde. Am 15. August 1483 wurde die Kapelle geweiht. Sie steht unter dem Patrozinium der Aufnahme Mariens in den Himmel.

Sie liegt unmittelbar nördlich des Petersdoms und ist mit diesem über die Scala Regia und Sala Regiaverbunden. Für Touristen ist allerdings nur der Eintritt über die Vatikanischen Museenmöglich.

Architektur

Die Pläne für die Sixtinische Kapelle stammen von Baccio Pontelli. Der Grundriss ist rechteckig. Der Bau ist 40,9 Meter lang, 13,4 Meter breit und 20,7 Meter hoch. Die Kapelle ist in der Proportion des Salomonischen Tempels errichtet, ihre Länge entspricht in etwa der doppelten Höhe und der dreifachen Breite. Die Decke ist ein flaches Stichkappengewölbe.

Fresken

Blick in den Kapellenraum

Wandgemälde

Die Wandgemälde zeigen jeweils nach Osten Szenen aus dem Leben Jesu und Mose und wurden von verschiedenen Malern der Renaissance geschaffen: Sandro Botticelli, Pietro Perugino, Domenico Ghirlandaio, Cosimo Rosselli, Biagio d’Antonio und Luca Signorelli.

Nordwand: Geschichten aus dem Leben Jesu

Ursprünglich wurden Episoden aus dem Leben Jesu Christi in acht Bildern dargestellt. Der Zyklus begann mit der Geburt Christi, einem Werk von Perugino, das zugunsten des Jüngsten Gerichts von Michelangelo wieder entfernt werden musste. Die Motive aus dem Leben Jesu:

1. Taufe Christi (Perugino)
2. Versuchung Christi (Botticelli)
3. Berufung der ersten Apostel (Ghirlandaio)
4. Bergpredigt (Rosselli)
5. Schlüsselübergabe (Perugino)
6. Das Letzte Abendmahl (Rosselli)
7. Auferstehung Christi (ursprünglich von Ghirlandaio, 1522 zerstört, 60 Jahre später von Hendrick van den Broeckerneuert)

• 

  Perugino: Taufe Christi

• 

  Botticelli: Die Versuchung Christi

• 

  Ghirlandaio: Berufung der ersten Apostel

• 

  Perugino: Christus übergibt Petrus den Schlüssel zum Himmelreich

• 

  Rosselli: Die Bergpredigt

• 

  Rosselli: Das letzte Abendmahl

• 

  van den Broeck: Auferstehung Christi

Südwand: Leben des Mose

Auch die Geschichten aus dem Leben Mose füllten acht Bildfelder. Das Fresko mit der Auffindung des Mose von Perugino musste ebenfalls dem Jüngsten Gericht Michelangelos weichen. Die Motive aus dem Leben Mose (mit Parallelen zum Leben Jesu):

1. Wanderung des Mose nach Ägypten (Perugino)
2. Begebenheiten aus dem Leben des Mose (Botticelli)
3. Durchzug durch das Rote Meer (d’Antonio)
4. Übergabe der Gesetzestafeln (Rosselli)
5. Bestrafung von Korach, Datan und Abiram (Botticelli)
6. Testament und Tod des Mose (Signorelli)
7. Streit um den Leichnam von Mose (ursprünglich von Signorelli, 1522 zerstört, 60 Jahre später von Matteo Perez d’Aleccio erneuert)

• 

  Perugino: Wanderung Moses nach Ägypten

• 

  Botticelli: Begebenheiten aus dem Leben des Mose

• 

  Botticelli: Die Bestrafung von Korach, Datan und Abiram

• 

  Signorelli: Testament und Tod Mose

Deckengemälde

Besondere Berühmtheit erlangte die Kapelle durch ihre Ausschmückung mit Fresken. Die Deckenmalereien malte Michelangelo Buonarroti zwischen 1508 und 1512 im Auftrag von Papst Julius II. Sie wurden am 1. November 1512 enthüllt und zeigen Szenen aus der Genesis auf insgesamt 520 m² mit 115 überlebensgroßen Charakteren. Besonders der Ausschnitt Die Erschaffung Adams ist ein weltbekanntes und oft reproduziertes Werk. Es zeigt, wie Gottvater mit ausgestrecktem Finger Adam zum Leben erweckt.

vergrößern und Informationen zum Bild anzeigen

„Ohne die Sixtinische Kapelle gesehen zu haben, kann man sich keinen anschauenden Begriff machen, was ein Mensch vermag.“

– Johann Wolfgang Goethe^[1]

Zentrale Bildfelder

Deckenfresken, Übersicht

Der zentrale Grat besteht aus neun waagerechten Bildfeldern unterschiedlicher Größe, die die Szenen aus dem Alten Testamentdarstellen, wobei immer drei Felder zusammengehören: Schöpfung, Adam und Eva sowie Noah. Michelangelo malte diese Fresken in umgekehrter zeitlicher Reihenfolge, indem er mit der Trunkenheit Noahs begann. Ab der Erschaffung Evas wird die Darstellung monumentaler, auch die begleitenden Propheten und Sibyllen werden expressiver. Diese narrativen Felder sind umgeben von Motiven aus der Bibel und der antikenMythologie.

1. Die Scheidung von Licht und Finsternis: „Und Gott sprach, es werde Licht!“ (Genesis 1, 3–5)
2. Die Erschaffung der Sonne, des Mondes und der Pflanzen: „Und Gott machte zwei große Lichter: ein großes Licht, das den Tag regiere, und ein kleines Licht, das die Nacht regiere …“ (Genesis 1, 16–17)
3. Die Scheidung von Land und Wasser: „Und Gott sprach: Es werde eine Feste zwischen den Wassern, die da scheide zwischen den Wassern.“ (Genesis 1, 6–7)
   

   Die Erschaffung Adams

4. Die Erschaffung Adams: „Und Gott sprach: Lasset uns den Menschen machen …“ (Genesis 1, 26)
5. Die Erschaffung Evas: „Da ließ Gott der Herr einen tiefen Schlaf fallen auf den Menschen, und er schlief ein. Und er nahm eine seiner Rippen und schloss die Stelle mit Fleisch. Und Gott der Herr baute ein Weib aus der Rippe, die er von dem Menschen nahm.“ (Genesis 2, 21–23)
6. Der Sündenfall und die Vertreibung aus dem Paradies: „Da sprach die Schlange zum Weibe: … und ihr werdet sein wie Gott und wissen, was gut und böse ist.“ (Genesis 3, 4–7)
7. Das Opfer Noahs: „Noah aber baute dem Herrn einen Altar und nahm von allem reinen Vieh und von allen reinen Vögeln und opferte Brandopfer auf dem Altar.“ (Genesis 8, 20)
8. Die Sintflut: „Da sprach Gott zu Noah: Das Ende allen Fleisches ist bei mir beschlossen, denn die Erde ist voller Frevel …“ (Genesis 6, 13 und 7, 6)
9. Die Trunkenheit Noahs: „Und da er von dem Wein trank, ward er trunken und lag im Zelt aufgedeckt.“ (Genesis 9, 20–22)

Benachbarte Darstellungen

Medaillon mit dem Tod des Urija

1. Medaillons: vergoldete Kreisscheiben mit Darstellung der Kämpfe aus dem Buch der Könige. Sie wurden von Michelangelos Helfern angefertigt, wobei auffällt, dass die vor dem Jahr 1511 gemalten Medaillons sorgfältiger ausgeführt wurden als die späteren.
2. Ignudi: Darstellung 20 nackter, muskulöser junger Männer, die mit Bändern und Eichenblättern geschmückt sind (Traubeneiche heißt übrigens auf italienisch „rovere“ und ist eine Anspielung auf den Familiennamen des Papstes Julius II.: „della Rovere“).

Propheten und Sibyllen

Cumäische Sibylle

Das Jüngste Gericht in der Sixtinischen Kapelle nach der Restaurierung

Detail aus dem Jüngsten Gericht

Selbstporträt Michelangelos auf der Haut des Bartholomäus

Neben den Propheten des Alten Testaments stellte Michelangelo auch Sibyllendar, Figuren aus der antiken Mythologie, die ebenfalls die Gabe der Weissagung besessen haben sollen. Die bekannteste dieser Sybillen ist die Cumäische, die die Geburt eines Erlösers vorhergesagt haben soll:

Das letzte Zeitalter, das von der Cumäischen Sibylle besungen wurde, wird kommen: „[…] seid freundlich gegenüber dem Knaben, der geboren werden wird […].“ (Vergil, IV. Ekloge)

Begleitet werden diese Darstellungen von Genien, die vermutlich deren Gedanken verkörpern und einen Kontrast zu deren Monumentalität bieten. Auffällig ist, dass die Propheten und Sybillen von einem Ende der Kapelle zum anderen größer werden. Es ist möglich, dass Michelangelo dadurch die perspektivische Verkürzung korrigieren wollte.

1. Prophet Sacharja
2. Delphische Sibylle
3. Prophet Jesaja
4. Sibylle von Cumae
5. Prophet Daniel
6. Libysche Sibylle
7. Prophet Jona
8. Prophet Jeremia
9. Persische Sibylle
10. Prophet Ezechiel
11. Sibylle von Erythrai
12. Prophet Joel

Vier Eckzwickel

Diese Gewölbezwickelbestehen aus vier großen Dreiecksfeldern an den Ecken des Gewölbes, die heroische Ereignisse aus dem Alten Testament schildern. Michelangelo nutzte bei diesen Feldern den Kunstgriff der Verkürzung, sodass diese Felder von unten richtig erfasst werden können.

1. David und Goliath
2. Judith und Holofernes
3. Die Bestrafung des Haman
4. Die eherne Schlange

Vorfahren Jesu

In den vierzehn halbkreisförmigen Lünetten über den Fenstern sind die Vorfahren Jesu dargestellt, wie sie bei Matthäus aufgezählt werden (Mt 1,1-16). Ihre Namen sind auf Schrifttafeln vermerkt. Die Abbildungen in den acht Stichkappen dienen vermutlich als Ergänzung, eine einwandfreie Identifizierung dieser Personen ist aber – ebenso wie bei den Lünetten – nicht möglich. Michelangelo stellte die Vorfahrenreihe vollständig dar, entfernte aber Jahre später eigenhändig die Bilder von Abraham bis Aram, um Platz für sein Jüngstes Gericht zu schaffen. So sind heute nur noch die Vorfahren Jesu ab Amminadab erhalten. Die Reihe beginnt vorn rechts an der Südwand und wird dann abwechselnd an Nordwand und Südwand fortgesetzt. Allerdings gibt es eine Ausnahme: Die Gruppe Joschijah, Jojachin und Schealtiël ist nach der Gruppe Hiskija, Manasse und Amon ebenfalls an der Nordwand platziert.

1. Amminadab
2. Nachschon
3. Salmon, Boas und Obed
4. Isai, David und Salomo
5. Rehabeam und Abija
6. Asa, Joschafat und Joram
7. Usija, Jotam und Ahas
8. Hiskija, Manasse und Amon
9. Joschija, Jojachin und Schealtiël
10. Serubbabel, Abihud und Eljakim
11. Azor und Zadok
12. Achim und Eliud
13. Eleasar und Mattan
14. Jakob und Josef

Bildprogramm

Das Bildprogramm des Deckengemäldes wird seit Erwin Panofskyneuplatonisch gedeutet. Michelangelo habe unter dem Einfluss Marsilio Ficinos (1433–1499) gestanden, eines einflussreichen Florentiner Philosophen, der die Lehren des Christentums mit denen Platons und Plotins in Einklang zu bringen versuchte. Ihn hatte Michelangelo in seiner Jugend wohl noch persönlich kennengelernt, sein theologischer Berater, der Generalprior des AugustinerordensAegidius de Viterbo, war ein entschiedener Anhänger Ficinos. Die einzelnen Tableaus des Deckenfreskos zeigen in dieser Interpretation den Aufstieg der in Leiblichkeit und Laster befangenen menschlichen Seele zurück zu ihrem göttlichen Ursprung, von der Trunkenheit Noahs, der Sintflut und dem Sündenfall über die die Gottebenbildlichkeit betonende Erschaffung Adams, in der die unmittelbar bevorstehende Berührung der Finger den geistigen Funken überspringen lässt, bis zur Scheidung des Lichts von der Finsternis am ersten Tag. Dabei werde Gott immer weniger anthropomorph dargestellt. Mit der Abbildung der heidnischen Sibyllen, gleichberechtigt mit den alttestamentlichen Propheten, habe Michelangelo im Sinne einer Philosophia perennis zum Ausdruck bringen wollen, dass das Christentum die Erfüllung sowohl der altisraelischen als auch der griechischen Weissagungen gebracht habe.^[2]

Stirnwandfresko ‘Jüngstes Gericht’

1532, über zwanzig Jahre später, wurde Michelangelo von Clemens VII. beauftragt, ein weiteres Fresko für die Wand über dem Altar anzufertigen, das das Jüngste Gericht darstellen sollte. Dieses Werk ersetzte drei Fresken des Malers Perugino (Geburt Christi, Auffindung Moses’, Himmelfahrt Mariens).

Michelangelo arbeitete von 1536^[3] bis 1541 an dem Fresko, um es im Alter von 66 Jahren fertigzustellen. Das Gemälde enthält auf über 200 m² ca. 390 Figuren, viele davon überlebensgroß. Es wird angenommen, dass Michelangelo alle Arbeiten an den Fresken ohne Mithilfe anderer Künstler und Assistenten ausführte, was zu seiner Zeit durchaus nicht üblich war.

Das Wandgemälde war Anlass für einen heftigen Streit zwischen Michelangelo und Kardinal Carafa, der die Darstellung als amoralisch und obszön bezeichnete^[4].

Auf diesem Bild stellt sich Michelangelo auf der abgezogenen Haut des Märtyrers Bartholomäus dar.

Rezeption

Durch die Darstellung von Geschlechtsteilen stieß das Gemälde seinerzeit oftmals auf Ablehnung. Kurz vor Michelangelos Tod 1564 wurde der Erlass („Pictura in Cappella Ap[ostoli]ca coopriantur“)verabschiedet, der Übermalungen von als unsittlich empfundenen Ausschnitten vorsah. Die Übermalungen wurden bald begonnen und auch noch viele Jahrzehnte später fortgesetzt. Hiermit beauftragt wurde Daniele da Volterra, was diesem den Spottnamen Braghettone(„Hosenmaler“) eintrug.

Erst bei der letzten ausgiebigen Restaurierung (1980–1994) wurde das Gemälde wieder in seinen Urzustand zurückversetzt, auch durch Behebung der Beschädigungen durch vorangegangene Restaurierungen. Unter anderem wurden dabei Rußspuren entfernt und verschattete, im Laufe der Jahrhunderte nachgedunkelte Flächen aufgehellt, so dass geradezu leuchtende Farben zum Vorschein kamen. Kunsthistoriker hatten lange geglaubt, dass Michelangelo mit sehr gedämpften Farben gemalt habe. Die Nacktheit der Heiligen konnte jedoch nicht wiederhergestellt werden, da Volterra die entsprechenden Stellen abgeschlagen und auf frischen Putz neu freskiert hatte. Die Fresken des Michelangelo für die Sixtinische Kapelle werden mitunter als die bedeutendsten Werke des Künstlers und der ganzen damaligen Kunstepoche bezeichnet.

Restaurierung (1982–1994)

Die Decke der Sistina und die Stirnwand mit dem Jüngsten Gericht wurden ab 1982 unter Finanzierung eines japanischen Konzerns sorgfältig mit destilliertem Wasser und mit einer mit Ammoniumcarbonat verdünnten Lösung restauriert. Nippon Televisionhat die Autorenrechte an 170.000 Metern Film (250 Stunden Spieldauer) und an 500 Dias, auf denen die Fresken vor, während und nach der Restaurierung zu sehen sind.

Schon hundert Jahre nach dem Tod Michelangelos hatten die Versuche begonnen, die ersten durch eindringendes Regenwasser, Schmutz und Kerzenschmauch entstandenen Schäden zu beheben. Doch häufig verschlechterte sich der Zustand der Fresken durch ungeschickte Arbeit. So entstanden im Laufe der Zeit Legenden: Michelangelo selbst habe einen Schleier über seine Fresken gemalt, um einen besonderen Effekt zu erzielen, oder vom Dunkel überlagerte Farben seien ein Charakteristikum des alternden Künstlers. Jetzt sorgen eine neue Dachkonstruktion, Klimaanlage und Feuchtigkeitsregelung dafür, dass die Fresken keinen Schaden mehr nehmen. Ein Spezialläufer in den Vorräumen sorgt sogar dafür, den Besuchern den Straßenstaub von den Schuhen zu nehmen.^[5]

Daniel (Michelangelo) vor und nach der Restaurierung

Bei dieser jüngsten Restaurierung ist eine dicke Schicht von Ruß und anderem Schmutz entfernt worden, und dabei trat eine ungeahnt starke Farbigkeit zu Tage. Die reinen Restaurierungsarbeiten waren 1994 abgeschlossen; am 11. Dezember 1999 fand die feierliche Wiedereröffnung der gesamten restaurierten Kapelle durch Papst Johannes Paul II. statt,^[6] knapp vor Beginn des heiligen Jahres 2000.

Die Restaurierung unter der Leitung des Chefrestaurators Gianluigi Colalucci wurde folgendermaßen ausgeführt: Zuerst wurde die Fläche mit doppelt destilliertem Wasser abgewaschen, dann wurde der größte Teil mit einem Lösungsmittel behandelt, um die Nacharbeiten früherer Restauratoren zu beseitigen. Lösungsmittel und Oberflächenschmutz wurden anschließend mit einem wassergetränkten Schwamm abgewischt. Diese Prozedur wurde mehrfach wiederholt, es lagen aber immer 24 Stunden Trockenzeit dazwischen.

In früheren Zeiten ging man mit dem Kunstwerk derber um. Frühere Restauratoren arbeiteten mit Brot und Wasser. War der Schmutz zu hartnäckig, diente griechischer Harzwein als Lösungsmittel. Es entstand eine Schicht, die zwar schützte, aber auch die Farben verdunkelte. Bereits wenige Jahrzehnte nach der Fertigstellung ließ man die Fresken durch sog. „mundatores“, also Reiniger, bearbeiten. Frische Farben sollten durch Leinfirnis erreicht werden, die sich mit dem Untergrund verbanden, also in das Originalmaterial des Freskos eindrangen. Damit waren spätere Restaurierungen an der Originalschicht ausgeschlossen.

Solcher Vorgang sieht inzwischen anders aus: Zuerst werden Ruß und Schmutz im Labor untersucht. Die Konzentration des Lösungsmittels kann dann der jeweiligen Verschmutzung angepasst werden. Das Lösungsmittel besteht aus einer Mischung aus Ammonium- und Natriumhydrogencarbonat, Carboxymethylcellulose und Fungiziden, verdünnt mit destilliertem Wasser. Die Spuren früherer Restauratoren lassen sich durch Infrarot-Analysen sichtbar machen. Die Schäden im Mauerwerk sind mittlerweile beträchtlich. An Stellen, wo sich der Putz vom Mauerwerk abzulösen droht, wird mit einer Spritze ein PVC-Kleber unter den Putz gebracht.

Im Oktober 2014 wurde eine neue LED-Beleuchtung in Betrieb genommen, die durch die Fenster eindringendes Tageslicht simuliert. Zudem wurde eine ausfahrbare Beleuchtung für besondere Anlässe installiert. Sie soll etwa beim Konklave den Kardinälen das Lesen von Wahlzetteln und Dokumenten erleichtern. Ziel des Anbringens einer neuen Beleuchtung war neben der Ausleuchtung der Fresken die durch LED-Technik verminderte Wärmeentwicklung und Energieersparnis bis zu 90 %.^[7][8]

Taufen in der Kapelle

Einer jüngeren Übung folgend, spendet der Papst jedes Jahr am Fest der Taufe des Herrn Kindern (zumeist vatikanischer Angestellter) in der Sixtinischen Kapelle das Sakrament der Taufe. Papst Benedikt XVI. feierte die Messe in italienischer Sprache am historischen Hochaltar der gewesteten Sixtina direkt unter dem Jüngsten Gericht des Michelangelo und nicht wie in früheren Jahren an einem nach der Liturgiereform für Messfeiern jeweils vor dem Hochaltar aufgebauten Volksaltar.^[9]

Orgel

Seit einigen Jahren befindet sich in der Kapelle eine Orgel. Das Werk von Mathis Orgelbau aus Näfels im Kanton Glarus (Schweiz) wurde im Dezember 2002 installiert. Die mechanische Schleifladenorgel besitzt 14 Register auf zwei Manualen und Pedal. Das Instrument hat folgende Disposition:^[10]

I Hauptwerk C–g3 1. Principal 8′ 2. Rohrflöte 8′ 3. Octave 4′ 4. Quinte 2 2⁄3′ 5. Flageolet 2′ 6. Terz 1 3⁄5′ 7. Mixtur II-III 1 1⁄3′

II Positiv C–g3 8. Gedackt 8′ 9. Blockflöte 4′ 10. Principal 2′ 11. Larigot 1 1⁄3′

Pedal C–f1 12. Subbass 16′ 13. Bordun 8′ 14. Choralbass 4′

• Koppeln: II/I, I/P
• Spielhilfen:Tremulant (ganze Orgel)

Literatur

• Berengaudus, Expositio super septem visiones libri Apocalypsis, in: Jacques-Paul Migne, Patrologia. Latina 17, col. 845 C.
• Malcolm Bull, Iconography of the Sistine Ceiling, The Burlington Magazine, 1988
• André Chastel: Die Sixtinische Kapelle, Benziger, Zürich / Köln 1986, 1993, ISBN 3-545-34059-7.
• Ginaluigi Colalucci, Fabrizio Mancinelli et al.: Die Sixtinische Kapelle. Die Deckenfresken. Benziger, Zürich u. Düsseldorf 1997
• Ginaluigi Colalucci, Fabrizio Mancinelli und Loren Partridge: Die Sixtinische Kapelle. Das Jüngste Gericht. Benziger, Zürich u. Düsseldorf 1997
• Pierluigi DeVecchi und Gianluigi Colalucci: Die Sixtinische Kapelle. Das Meisterwerk Michelangelos erstrahlt in neuem Glanz.
  • Orbis 2001
  • 272 Seiten, München, Bassermann, 2007, ISBN 978-3-8094-2080-4
• Joachim von Fiore, Concordia novi et veteris Testamenti, Venedig 1519,
• Michael Petery: Michelangelo. Der Zorn des Schöpfers, edition mbr, München-Ismaning 2008
• Heinrich PfeifferSJDie Sixtinische Kapelle neu entdeckt. Belser, Stuttgart 2007, ISBN 978-3-7630-2488-9
• Rolf Quednau: Rom bannt Luther. Michelangelos Jüngstes Gericht im Lichte der konfessionellen Spaltung. In: Andreas Tacke (Hrsg.), Kunst und Konfession. Katholische Auftragswerke im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung, 1517–1563. Regensburg 2008, S. 348–424.
• Robin Richmond: Michelangelo und die Sixtinische Kapelle. Herder Verlag, Freiburg im Breisgau 1999, ISBN 3-451-26912-0
• King Ross: „Michelangelo“, 384 Seiten, B&T, London, 2002, ISBN 978-0-14-200369-5
• Ernst Steinmann: Die Sixtinische Kapelle. 2 Bände. Bruckmann, München 1901–1905
• Charles de Tolnay: Michelangelo, Band II: The Sistine Ceiling. Princeton 1945, 3. Aufl. 1969
• Charles de Tolnay: Michelangelo, Band V: The Final Period. Princeton 1960, 2. Aufl. 1971

Filme

Aufgeführt sind Spielfilme oder Fernsehserien, in denen die Sixtinische Kapelle (entweder als Studionachbau oder CGI) einen wichtigen Schauplatz der Handlung darstellt.

• Michelangelo – Inferno und Ekstase (1965)
• In den Schuhen des Fischers (1968)
• Michelangelo – Genie und Leidenschaft (1991)
• Illuminati (2009)
• Habemus Papam – Ein Papst büxt aus (2011)
• The Young Pope (2016)

Weblinks

Commons: Sixtinische Kapelle – Album mit Bildern, Videos und Audiodateien

• Virtueller Rundgang durch die Sixtinische Kapelle
• Infos zur Sixtinischen Kapelle bei Vatikanische Museen
• Weitere Seite über die Sixtinische Kapelle (englisch)

Einzelnachweise

1. Hochspringen↑ Johann Wolfgang Goethe: Zweiter römischer Aufenthalt. In: Werke. Hrsg. von Erich Trunz. Bd. 11. 9., überarbeitete Aufl. C.H. Beck, München 1978, S. 350–556, hier S. 386 (Rom, den 23. August 1787).
2. Hochspringen↑ Jörg Lauster: Die Verzauberung der Welt. Eine Kulturgeschichte des Christentums. C.H. Beck, München 2014, S. 284–287.
3. Hochspringen↑ Das Jüngste Gericht. Vatikanische Museen; abgerufen am 15. Oktober 2012.
4. Hochspringen↑ Karl Möseneder: Michelangelos „Jüngstes Gericht“. Über die Schwierigkeiten des Disegno und die Freiheit der Kunst, in dsb., Hg.: Streit um Bilder. Von Byzanz bis Duchamp. Reimer, Berlin 1997, ISBN 3-496-01169-6, S. 95–118 (Lit.)
5. Hochspringen↑ Horst Schlitter im Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger vom 9./10. April 1994, S. 33.
6. Hochspringen↑ Ansprache von Johannes Paul II. bei der Einweihung der vollständig restaurierten Sixtinischen Kapelle
7. Hochspringen↑ http://www.focus.de/auto/neuheiten/coole-effizienz-gottes-erleuchtung_id_4196400.html
8. Hochspringen↑ http://www.osram.de/osram_de/news-und-wissen/innovation/innovation-news-neues-licht-fuer-die-sixtinische-kapelle/index.jsp
9. Hochspringen↑ Radio Vatikan: Taufe in der Sixtina 13. Januar 2008.
10. Hochspringen↑ Informationen zur Orgel

Cappella Sistina   Italian) Giacobbe Giusti, Sistine Chapel
Sistine Chapel, from the altar end
Location on a map of Vatican City
Basic information
Location	Vatican City
Affiliation	Roman Catholic
District	Diocese of Rome
Country	Vatican City
Year consecrated	15 August 1483
Ecclesiastical or organizational status	Papal oratory
Leadership	Francis
Website	mv.vatican.va
Architectural description
Architect(s)	Baccio Pontelli, Giovanni de Dolci[1]
Architectural type	Church
Groundbreaking	1473[1]
Completed	1481[1]
Specifications
Length	40.9 metres (134 ft)
Width (nave)	13.4 metres (44 ft)
Height (max)	20.7 metres (68 ft)
UNESCO World Heritage Site
Official name: Vatican City
Type	Cultural
Criteria	i, ii, iv, vi
Designated	1984[2]
Reference no.	286
State Party	Holy See
Region	Europe and North America

The Sistine Chapel (/ˌsɪstiːn ˈtʃæpəl/; Latin: Sacellum Sixtinum; Italian: Cappella Sistina[kapˈpɛlla siˈstiːna]) is a chapel in the Apostolic Palace, the official residence of the Pope, in Vatican City. Originally known as the Cappella Magna, the chapel takes its name from Pope Sixtus IV, who restored it between 1477 and 1480. Since that time, the chapel has served as a place of both religious and functionary papal activity. Today it is the site of the Papal conclave, the process by which a new pope is selected. The fame of the Sistine Chapel lies mainly in the frescosthat decorate the interior, and most particularly the Sistine Chapel ceiling and The Last Judgment by Michelangelo.

During the reign of Sixtus IV, a team of Renaissance painters that included Sandro Botticelli, Pietro Perugino, Pinturicchio, Domenico Ghirlandaio and Cosimo Roselli, created a series of frescos depicting the Life of Moses and the Life of Christ, offset by papal portraits above and trompe l’oeil drapery below. These paintings were completed in 1482, and on 15 August 1483 Sixtus IV celebrated the first mass in the Sistine Chapel for the Feast of the Assumption, at which ceremony the chapel was consecrated and dedicated to the Virgin Mary.^[3][4]

Between 1508 and 1512, under the patronage of Pope Julius II, Michelangelopainted the chapel’s ceiling, a project which changed the course of Western art and is regarded as one of the major artistic accomplishments of human civilization.^[5][6] In a different climate after the Sack of Rome, he returned and between 1535 and 1541, painted The Last Judgment for Popes Clement VII and Paul III.^[7] The fame of Michelangelo’s paintings has drawn multitudes of visitors to the chapel ever since they were revealed five hundred years ago.

History

While known as the location of Papal conclaves, the primary function of the Sistine Chapel is as the chapel of the Papal Chapel (Cappella Pontificia), one of the two bodies of the Papal household, called until 1968 the Papal Court (Pontificalis Aula). At the time of Pope Sixtus IV in the late 15th century, the Papal Chapel comprised about 200 people, including clerics, officials of the Vatican and distinguished laity. There were 50 occasions during the year on which it was prescribed by the Papal Calendar that the whole Papal Chapel should meet.^[8] Of these 50 occasions, 35 were masses, of which 8 were held in Basilicas, in general St. Peter’s, and were attended by large congregations. These included the Christmas Day and Easter masses, at which the Pope himself was the celebrant. The other 27 masses could be held in a smaller, less public space, for which the Cappella Maggiore was used before it was rebuilt on the same site as the Sistine Chapel.

The Cappella Maggiore derived its name, the Greater Chapel, from the fact that there was another chapel also in use by the Pope and his retinue for daily worship. At the time of Pope Sixtus IV, this was the Chapel of Pope Nicholas V, which had been decorated by Fra Angelico. The Cappella Maggiore is recorded as existing in 1368. According to a communication from Andreas of Trebizond to Pope Sixtus IV, by the time of its demolition to make way for the present chapel, the Cappella Maggiore was in a ruinous state with its walls leaning.^[9]

The Sistine Chapel as it may have appeared in the 15th century (19th-century drawing)

The present chapel, on the site of the Cappella Maggiore, was designed by Baccio Pontelli for Pope Sixtus IV, for whom it is named, and built under the supervision of Giovannino de Dolci between 1473 and 1481.^[1] The proportions of the present chapel appear to closely follow those of the original. After its completion, the chapel was decorated with frescoes by a number of the most famous artists of the High Renaissance, including Sandro Botticelli, Domenico Ghirlandaio, Pietro Perugino, and Michelangelo.^[9]

The first mass in the Sistine Chapel was celebrated on 15 August 1483, the Feast of the Assumption, at which ceremony the chapel was consecrated and dedicated to the Virgin Mary.^[10]

The Sistine Chapel has maintained its function to the present day, and continues to host the important services of the Papal Calendar, unless the Pope is travelling. There is a permanent choir, the Sistine Chapel Choir, for whom much original music has been written, the most famous piece being Gregorio Allegri‘s Miserere.^[11]

Papal conclave

Main article: Papal conclave

One of the functions of the Sistine Chapel is as a venue for the election of each successive pope in a conclave of the College of Cardinals. On the occasion of a conclave, a chimney is installed in the roof of the chapel, from which smoke arises as a signal. If white smoke appears, created by burning the ballots of the election, a new Pope has been elected. If a candidate receives less than a two-thirds vote, the cardinals send up black smoke — created by burning the ballots along with wet straw and chemical additives — it means that no successful election has yet occurred.^[12]

The conclave also provided for the cardinals a space in which they can hear mass, and in which they can eat, sleep, and pass time attended by servants. From 1455, conclaves have been held in the Vatican; until the Great Schism, they were held in the Dominican convent of Santa Maria sopra Minerva.^[13] Since 1996, John Paul II‘s Apostolic ConstitutionUniversi Dominici gregis requires the cardinals to be lodged in the Domus Sanctae Marthae during a papal conclave, but to continue to vote in the Sistine Chapel.^[14]

Canopies for each cardinal-elector were once used during conclaves—a sign of equal dignity. After the new Pope accepts his election, he would give his new name; at this time, the other Cardinals would tug on a rope attached to their seats to lower their canopies. Until reforms instituted by Saint Pius X, the canopies were of different colours to designate which Cardinals had been appointed by which Pope. Paul VIabolished the canopies altogether, since, under his papacy, the population of the College of Cardinals had increased so much to the point that they would need to be seated in rows of two against the walls, making the canopies obstruct the view of the cardinals in the back row.

Architecture

Structure

 

Exterior of the Sistine Chapel

The chapel is a high rectangular building, for which absolute measurements are hard to ascertain, as available measurements are for the interior: 40.9 metres (134 ft) long by 13.4 metres (44 ft) wide, the dimensions of the Temple of Solomon, as given in the Old Testament.^[15]

Its exterior is unadorned by architectural or decorative details, as is common in many Italian churches of the Medieval and Renaissance eras. It has no exterior façade or exterior processional doorways, as the ingress has always been from internal rooms within the Apostolic Palace (Papal Palace), and the exterior can be seen only from nearby windows and light-wells in the palace. Subsidence and cracking of masonry such as must also have affected the Cappella Maggiore has necessitated the building of very large buttresses to brace the exterior walls. The accretion of other buildings has further altered the exterior appearance of the Chapel.

The building is divided into three stories of which the lowest is a very tall basement level with several utilitarian windows and a doorway giving onto the exterior court. Internally, the basement is robustly vaulted to support the chapel. Above is the main space, the Sistine Chapel, the vaulted ceiling rising to 20.7 metres (68 ft). The building had six tall arched windows down each side and two at either end, several of which have been blocked. Above the vault is a third story with wardrooms for guards. At this level, an open projecting gangway was constructed, which encircled the building supported on an arcade springing from the walls. The gangway has been roofed as it was a continual source of water leaking in to the vault of the Chapel.

A reconstruction of the appearance of the chapel in the 1480s, prior to the painting of the ceiling.

Interior of the Sistine Chapel

The general proportions of the chapel use the length as the unit of measurement. This has been divided by three to get the width and by two to get the height. Maintaining the ratio, there were six windows down each side and two at either end. Defined proportions were a feature of Renaissance architecture and reflected the growing interest in the Classical heritage of Rome.

The ceiling of the chapel is a flattened barrel vault springing from a course that encircles the walls at the level of the springing of the window arches. This barrel vault is cut transversely by smaller vaults over each window, which divide the barrel vault at its lowest level into a series of large pendentives rising from shallow pilasters between each window. The barrel vault was originally painted brilliant-blue and dotted with gold stars, to the design of Piermatteo Lauro de’ Manfredi da Amelia.^[9]The pavement is in opus alexandrinum, a decorative style using marble and coloured stone in a pattern that reflects the earlier proportion in the division of the interior and also marks the processional way from the main door, used by the Pope on important occasions such as Palm Sunday.

A screen or transenna in marble by Mino da Fiesole, Andrea Bregno, and Giovanni Dalmata divides the chapel into two parts.^[16] Originally these made equal space for the members of the Papal Chapel within the sanctuary near the altar and the pilgrims and townsfolk without. However, with growth in the number of those attending the Pope, the screen was moved giving a reduced area for the faithful laity. The transenna is surmounted by a row of ornate candlesticks, once gilt, and has a wooden door, where once there was an ornate door of gilded wrought iron. The sculptors of the transenna also provided the cantoria or projecting choir gallery.

Decoration

Diagram of part of the vertical fresco decoration of the Sistine Chapel

History

The first stage in the decoration of the Sistine Chapel was the painting of the ceiling in blue, studded with gilt stars, and with decorative borders around the architectural details of the pendentives. This was entirely replaced when Michelangelo came to work on the ceiling in 1508.

Of the present scheme of frescos, the earliest part is that of the side walls. They are divided into three main tiers. The central tier of the walls has two cycles of paintings, which complement each other, The Life of Moses and The Life of Christ. They were commissioned in 1480 by Pope Sixtus IV and executed by Domenico Ghirlandaio, Sandro Botticelli, Pietro Perugino, Cosimo Roselli and their workshops. They originally ran all round the walls, but have since been replaced on both end walls.

The project was perhaps supervised by Perugino, who arrived at the chapel prior to the Florentines. It is probable that the commission of Ghirlandaio, Botticelli and Roselli was part of a reconciliation project between Lorenzo de’ Medici, the de factoruler of Florence, and Pope Sixtus IV. The Florentines started to work in the Sistine Chapel in the Spring of 1481.

Beneath the cycles of The Life of Moses and The Life of Christ, the lower level of the walls is decorated with frescoed hangings in silver and gold. Above the narrative frescos, the upper tier is divided into two zones. At the lower level of the windows is a Gallery of Popes painted at the same time as the Lives. Around the arched tops of the windows are areas known as the lunettes which contain the Ancestors of Christ, painted by Michelangelo as part of the scheme for the ceiling.

The ceiling was commissioned by Pope Julius II and painted by Michelangelo between 1508 and 1512. The commission was originally to paint the twelve apostles on the triangular pendentives which support the vault; however, Michelangelo demanded a free hand in the pictorial content of the scheme. He painted a series of nine pictures showing God’s Creation of the World, God’s Relationship with Mankind, and Mankind’s Fall from God’s Grace. On the large pendentives he painted twelve Biblical and Classical men and women who prophesied that God would send Jesus Christ for the salvation of mankind, and around the upper parts of the windows, the Ancestors of Christ.

In 1515, Raphael was commissioned by Pope Leo X to design a series of ten tapestries to hang around the lower tier of the walls.^[17] The tapestries depict events from the Life of St. Peter and the Life of St. Paul, the founders of the Christian Church in Rome, as described in the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. Work began in mid-1515. Due to their large size, manufacture of the hangings was carried out in Brussels, and took four years under the hands of the weavers in the shop of Pieter van Aelst.^[18] Raphael’s tapestries were looted during the Sack of Rome in 1527 and were either burnt for their precious metal content or were scattered around Europe. In the late 20th century, a set was reassembled from several further sets that had been made after the first set, and displayed again in the Sistine Chapel in 1983. The tapestries continue in use at occasional ceremonies of particular importance. The full-size preparatory cartoons for seven of the ten tapestries are known as the Raphael Cartoons and are in London.^[19]

At this point, the decorative scheme displayed a consistent iconographical pattern. The tier of Popes, which, in the scheme intended by Pope Julius, would have appeared immediately below the Twelve Apostles, would have emphasised the apostolic succession. It has been argued that the present scheme shows the two Biblical Testaments merged in order to reveal the Old predicting and framing the New, synthesizing, the logic of the Christian Bible.^[20]

This was disrupted by a further commission to Michelangelo to decorate the wall above the altar with The Last Judgment, 1537–1541. The painting of this scene necessitated the obliteration of two episodes from the Lives, the Nativity of Jesus and the Finding of Moses; several of the Popes and two sets of Ancestors.

Frescoes

Trials of Moses by Botticelli

Southern wall

The southern wall is decorated with the Stories of Moses, painted in 1481–1482. Starting from the altar, they include:

• Moses Leaving to Egypt by Pietro Perugino and assistants
• The Trials of Moses by Sandro Botticelli and his workshop
• The Crossing of the Red Sea by Cosimo Rosselli, Domenico Ghirlandaio or Biagio di Antonio Tucci
• Descent from Mount Sinai by Cosimo Rosselli or Piero di Cosimo
• Punishment of the Rebels by Sandro Botticelli
• Testament and Death of Moses by Luca Signorelli or Bartolomeo della Gatta

Northern wall

The Delivery of the Keys by Perugino

The northern wall houses the Stories of Jesus, dating to 1481–1482. They include:

• Baptism of Christ by Pietro Perugino and assistants
• Temptation of Christ by Sandro Botticelli
• Vocation of the Apostles by Domenico Ghirlandaio
• The Sermon on the Mount, attributed to Cosimo Rosselli
• The Delivery of the Keys by Pietro Perugino
• The Last Supper by Cosimo Rosselli

Eastern wall

• Resurrection of Christ
  

  Resurrection of Christ

  by Hendrick van den Broeck(1572) over Domenico Ghirlandaio’s original

• Disputation over Moses’ Body by Matteo da Lecce(1574) over Luca Signorelli’s original

Michelangelo’s frescoes

The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo

Michelangelo was commissioned by Pope Julius II in 1508 to repaint the vault, or ceiling, of the Chapel. It was originally painted as golden stars on a blue sky. The work was completed between 1508 and 2 November 1512.^[21]He painted the Last Judgment over the altar, between 1535 and 1541, on commission from Pope Paul IIIFarnese.^[22]

Michelangelo was intimidated by the scale of the commission, and made it known from the outset of Julius II’s approach that he would prefer to decline. He felt he was more of a sculptor than a painter, and was suspicious that such a large-scale project was being offered to him by enemies as a set-up for an inevitable fall. For Michelangelo, the project was a distraction from the major marble sculpture that had preoccupied him for the previous few years.^[23]

The sources of Michelangelo’s inspiration are not easily determined; both Joachite and Augustinian theologians were within the sphere of Julius influence.^[24]

Ceiling

Main article: Sistine Chapel ceiling

See also: Gallery of Sistine Chapel ceiling

A section of the Sistine Chapel ceiling

To be able to reach the ceiling, Michelangelo needed a support; the first idea was by Julius’ favoured architect Donato Bramante, who wanted to build for him a scaffold to be suspended in the air with ropes. However, Bramante did not successfully complete the task, and the structure he built was flawed. He had perforated the vault in order to lower strings to secure the scaffold. Michelangelo laughed when he saw the structure, and believed it would leave holes in the ceiling once the work was ended. He asked Bramante what was to happen when the painter reached the perforations, but the architect had no answer.

The matter was taken before the Pope, who ordered Michelangelo to build a scaffold of his own. Michelangelo created a flat wooden platform on brackets built out from holes in the wall, high up near the top of the windows. Contrary to popular belief, he did not lie on this scaffolding while he painted, but painted from a standing position.^[25]

Michelangelo used bright colours, easily visible from the floor. On the lowest part of the ceiling he painted the ancestors of Christ. Above this he alternated male and female prophets, with Jonah over the altar. On the highest section, Michelangelo painted nine stories from the Book of Genesis. He was originally commissioned to paint only 12 figures, the Apostles. He turned down the commission because he saw himself as a sculptor, not a painter. The Pope offered to allow Michelangelo to paint biblical scenes of his own choice as a compromise. After the work was finished, there were more than 300. His figures showed the creation, Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, and the Great Flood.

The painted area is about 40 m (131 ft) long by 13 m (43 ft) wide. This means that Michelangelo painted well over 5,000 square feet (460 m²) of frescoes.^[26]

Last Judgement

Michelangelo’s The Last Judgement.

Main article: The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

The Last Judgement was painted by Michelangelo from 1535 to 1541, between two important historic events, the Sack of Rome by mercenary forces of the Holy Roman Empire in 1527 and the Council of Trent which commenced in 1545. The work was designed on a grand scale, and spans the entire wall behind the altar of the Sistine Chapel. The painting depicts the second coming of Christ on the Day of Judgment as described in the Revelation of John, Chapter 20. High on the wall is the heroic figure of Christ, with the saints clustered in groups around him. At the bottom left of the painting the dead are raised from their graves and ascend to be judged. To the right are those who are assigned to Hell and are dragged down by demons.

The Last Judgement was an object of a bitter dispute between Cardinal Carafa and Michelangelo. Because he depicted naked figures, the artist was accused of immorality and obscenity. A censorship campaign (known as the « Fig-Leaf Campaign ») was organized by Carafa and Monsignor Sernini (Mantua‘s ambassador) to remove the frescoes.

The Pope’s Master of Ceremonies Biagio da Cesena said « it was most disgraceful that in so sacred a place there should have been depicted all those nude figures, exposing themselves so shamefully, and that it was no work for a papal chapel but rather for the public baths and taverns, »^[27] In response Michelangelo worked da Cesena’s semblance into the scene as Minos, judge of the underworld. It is said that when he complained to the Pope, the pontiff responded that his jurisdiction did not extend to hell, so the portrait would have to remain. Michelangelo also painted his own portrait, on the flayed skin held by St Bartholomew.

The genitalia in the fresco were later covered by the artist Daniele da Volterra, whom history remembers by the derogatory nickname « Il Braghettone » (« the breeches-painter »).

Restoration and controversy

Main article: Restoration of the Sistine Chapel frescoes

The Sistine Chapel’s ceiling restoration began on 7 November 1984. The restoration complete, the chapel was re-opened to the public on 8 April 1994. The part of the restoration in the Sistine Chapel that has caused the most concern is the ceiling, painted by Michelangelo. The emergence of the brightly coloured Ancestors of Christfrom the gloom sparked a reaction of fear that the processes being employed in the cleaning were too severe and removed the original intent of the artist.

Daniel, before and after restoration.

The problem lies in the analysis and understanding of the techniques utilised by Michelangelo, and the technical response of the restorers to that understanding. A close examination of the frescoes of the lunettesconvinced the restorers that Michelangelo worked exclusively in « buon fresco« ; that is, the artist worked only on freshly laid plaster and each section of work was completed while the plaster was still in its fresh state. In other words, Michelangelo did not work « a secco« ; he did not come back later and add details onto the dry plaster.

The restorers, by assuming that the artist took a universal approach to the painting, have taken a universal approach to the restoration. A decision was made that all of the shadowy layer of animal glue and « lamp black », all of the wax, and all of the overpainted areas were contamination of one sort or another: smoke deposits, earlier restoration attempts, and painted definition by later restorers in an attempt to enliven the appearance of the work. Based on this decision, according to Arguimbau’s critical reading of the restoration data that have been provided, the chemists of the restoration team decided upon a solvent that would effectively strip the ceiling down to its paint-impregnated plaster. After treatment, only that which was painted « buon fresco » would remain.^{[citation needed]}

Replicas

The only reproduction of the Sistine Chapel ceiling was painted by Gary Bevans at a church in Goring-by-Sea, West Sussex, England.^[28] A full-size architectural and photographic replica of the entire building was commissioned by the Mexican Government and funded by private donors.^[29] It was on view at Mexico City from June 1 to July 15, 2016; it may then be exhibited at other Mexican cities and possibly elsewhere in the world. It took 2.6 million high definition photographs to reproduce the totality of the frescoes and tapestries.^[30] A video of the history of the Chapel is shown to the visitors before entering the building; inside, a light-and-sound demonstration explains the content of each of the frescoes.

Quotes on Michelangelo’s frescoes in the Sistine Chapel

« Without having seen the Sistine Chapel one can form no appreciable idea of what one man is capable of achieving. »

— Johann Wolfgang Goethe, 23 August 1787, ^[31]

« This work has been and truly is a beacon of our art, and it has brought such benefit and enlightenment to the art of painting that it was sufficient to illuminate a world which for so many hundreds of years had remained in the state of darkness. And, to tell the truth, anyone who is a painter no longer needs to concern himself about seeing innovations and inventions, new ways of painting poses, clothing on figures, and various awe-inspiring details, for Michelangelo gave to this work all the perfection that can be given to such details. »

— Giorgio Vasari on Michelangelo’s frescoes in the Sistine Chapel

Giacobbe Giusti, システィーナ礼拝堂

システィーナ礼拝堂 Cappella Sistina （イタリア語） Sacellum Sixtinum （ラテン語） Giacobbe Giusti, システィーナ礼拝堂
システィーナ礼拝堂内部
バチカン市国における位置
基本情報
所在地	ヴァチカン
宗教	ローマ・カトリック
奉献年	1483年8月15日
教会的現況	ローマ教皇礼拝堂
管理者	フランシスコ
ウェブサイト	mv.vatican.va
建設
建築家	バッチオ・ポンテッリ、ジョヴァンニ・デ・ドルッチ[1]
形式	教会
着工	1473年[1]
完成	1481年[1]
建築物
横幅	40.9メートル (134 ft)
奥行(身廊)	13.4メートル (44 ft)
最長部(最高)	20.7メートル (68 ft)
世界遺産
正式名称: ヴァチカン市国
基準	i, ii, iv, vi
登録日	1984年[2]
登録番号	286
登録区分	文化遺産

システィーナ礼拝堂（システィーナれいはいどう、伊: Cappella Sistina）は、ローマ教皇の公邸であるバチカン宮殿にある礼拝堂。サン・ピエトロ大聖堂北隣に位置するその建物とともに、ミケランジェロ、ボッティチェッリ、ペルジーノ、ピントゥリッキオら、盛期ルネサンスを代表する芸術家たちが内装に描いた数々の装飾絵画作品で世界的に有名な礼拝堂である。とくにローマ教皇ユリウス2世の注文でミケランジェロが1508年から1512年にかけて描いた天井画と、ローマ教皇クレメンス7世が注文し、ローマ教皇パウルス3世が完成を命じた、1535年から1541年にかけて描いた『最後の審判』はミケランジェロの絵画作品の頂点とされている。

もともとバチカン宮殿に存在していた古い礼拝堂を1477年から1480年にかけてローマ教皇シクストゥス4世が建て直させた建物で、その教皇名（伊: Sisto IV）にちなんでシスティーナ礼拝堂と名付けられた。この建て直し時には、ペルジーノ、ボッティチェッリ、ギルランダイオらの芸術家たちが、一連の内装フレスコ壁画を手がけている。壁画に描かれているのは『旧約聖書』からの「モーセの生涯の物語」ならびに『新約聖書』からの「キリストの生涯の物語」と、歴代のローマ教皇の肖像画で、これらは1482年から1483年8月にかけて描かれた作品となっている^[3]。落成したシスティーナ礼拝堂で最初のミサを執り行ったのはシクストゥス4世だった。このミサは聖母被昇天に捧げられたもので、システィーナ礼拝堂を聖母マリアに奉献することを表明する式典でもあった^[4]。

シクストゥス4世以降、システィーナ礼拝堂は宗教的施設とローマ教皇執務室という二つの役割を果たしてきた。現在ではローマ教皇を選出する会議であるコンクラーヴェの会場としても使用されている。

歴史

システィーナ礼拝堂はローマ教皇を選出するコンクラーヴェが開催される場所として広く知られている。しかしながら、教皇礼拝堂 (Cappella Pontificia) の一角を構成するシスティーナ礼拝堂は、1968年まで教皇宮殿 (Pontificalis Aula) と呼ばれていた教皇公邸 (Domus Pontificalis) としての性格も持っている。シクストゥス4世が在位していた15世紀後半の教皇礼拝堂には、聖職者、聖座職員、高位の平信徒らおよそ200人の人々が関わっており、年間50件におよぶ式典、行事を執り行うことが定められていた^[5]。これらの行事で35件を占めるのがミサで、そのうち8件が通常サン・ピエトロ大聖堂で実施されており、多数の信徒が集まる一大式典だった。クリスマスやイースターのミサには教皇自ら典礼として参加していた。残り27件のミサは比較的小規模で大きな施設を必要としなかったこともあって、システィーナ礼拝堂が完成する以前にはマッジョーレ礼拝堂が使用されていた。

ローマ教皇シクストゥス4世

ヴァチカン宮殿にはマッジョーレ礼拝堂のほかにも、ローマ教皇と教皇庁職員が日々の祈りを捧げる場所として使用される礼拝堂があり、シクストゥス4世在位時にはニコラウス5世が建てた、フラ・アンジェリコが内部装飾を手がけた礼拝堂が使用されていた。マッジョーレ礼拝堂は少なくとも1368年までは存在していたことが記録として残っている。しかしながら、後年のトラブゾンのアンドレアスとシクストゥス4世とのやりとりには、当時のマッジョーレ礼拝堂は荒廃して壁は傾いており、新しい礼拝堂を建設するために取り壊す必要があることが記されている^[6]。

システィーナ礼拝堂はマッジョーレ礼拝堂の跡地に建てられている。シクストゥス4世の命でバッチオ・ポンテッリ (en:Baccio Pontelli) が設計し、ジョヴァンニ・デ・ドリッチの総指揮のもとで1473年から1481年にかけて建設された^[1]。現在でもシスティーナ礼拝堂の外観はほぼ建設当時のままである。建物の完成後、盛期ルネサンスを代表する芸術家であるボッティチェッリ、ギルランダイオ、ペルジーノ、ミケランジェロらによるフレスコ画で内部装飾がなされた^[6]。

完成後のシスティーナ礼拝堂で最初のミサが執り行われたのは1483年8月9日である。このミサは聖母被昇天に捧げられたもので、システィーナ礼拝堂が聖母マリアに奉献されることを公表する式典でもあった^[4]。現在でもシスティーナ礼拝堂はさまざまな式典や行事などに使用されており、ローマ教皇が外遊などで不在の場合を除いて、ローマ教皇庁の公式行事の重要な開催場所である。世界最古の聖歌隊の一つであるシスティーナ礼拝堂聖歌隊 (en:Sistine Chapel Choir) は、ルネサンス期に作曲された合唱曲を現在にそのまま伝えており、なかでもローマ楽派の作曲家グレゴリオ・アレグリの『ミゼレーレ』がとくに有名な楽曲となっている^[7]。

コンクラーヴェ

詳細は「コンクラーヴェ」を参照

システィーナ礼拝堂が持つ最重要機能として、枢機卿団 (en:College of Cardinals) が次代のローマ教皇を選出する会議であるコンクラーヴェの開催場所となっていることがあげられる。コンクラーヴェ開催中にはシスティーナ礼拝堂の屋根に煙突が設置され、そこから排気される煙の色でコンクラーヴェの状況が告知される。投票によって新たなローマ教皇が選出された場合には、投票に使用された用紙が燃やされて白い煙があがる。投票の結果、候補者の最大得票数が全体の三分の二に満たない場合には、投票用紙とともに湿った藁と化学添加剤が燃やされて煙突から黒い煙があがり、次代のローマ教皇は未決定であるということを知らせる^[8]。

コンクラーヴェの期間中は枢機卿団は外出が許されず、ミサの出席、食事、就寝など日々の生活はすべて、特に選別された世話係の手を借りてコンクラーヴェ会場内で行わなければならなかった。1455年以降コンクラーヴェはヴァチカン宮殿内で実施されており、教皇が複数鼎立した教会大分裂まではドミニコ会教会堂のサンタ・マリア・ソプラ・ミネルヴァ教会がコンクラーヴェの開催場所となっていた^[9]。

ヨハネ・パウロ2世が1996年に発布した『使徒憲章』「使徒座空位とローマ教皇選出について」(en:Universi Dominici Gregis) で、コンクラーヴェ期間中の枢機卿の宿舎はコンクラーヴェ会場のシスティーナ礼拝堂ではなくドムス・サンクテ・マルテ（聖マルタの家 (en:Domus Sanctae Marthae)）とするように変更されたが、ローマ教皇選出の投票自体は従前どおりシスティーナ礼拝堂で実施するよう定められている^[10]。

建物

外観

Giacobbe Giusti, システィーナ礼拝堂

システィーナ礼拝堂の外観

システィーナ礼拝堂はレンガ造りの長方形の建物である。簡素な外観で、建築様式上の特徴も装飾もなく、イタリアでよく見られる中世からルネサンス期に建てられた教会堂と変わりはない。ファサードも行列用の入場口もなく、礼拝堂への入り口はヴァチカン宮殿内から通じる一箇所のみとなっており、システィーナ礼拝堂はヴァチカン宮殿の窓あるいは光井戸からわずかに垣間見える程度である。礼拝堂は三階建てで、一階部分がもっとも大きく、実用的な窓がはめ込まれた壁面と円天井、そしてヴァチカン宮殿へと通じる出入り口で構成されている。システィーナ礼拝堂のもっとも重要な階層といえる二階は奥行き40.9m、幅13.4mで、これは『旧約聖書』の『列王記』6章にあるソロモン王の神殿の比率と同じである^[11]。円天井の高さは20.7mで、壁両側面にはそれぞれ6枚の細長いアーチ状の窓があり、片端面には2枚の窓がある。三階部分は衛士の控え室となっている。三階部分には建築途中で放棄されている、外壁のアーチ状構造物に支えられた、礼拝堂を巡る渡り通路がある。この渡り廊下の屋根からは頻繁に雨漏りが生じている。

地盤沈下とレンガのひび割れに悩まされたマッジョーレ礼拝堂を教訓として、システィーナ礼拝堂には外壁を補強する大規模な控え壁が採用された。システィーナ礼拝堂より後に建てられたヴァチカン宮殿付属の建物は、システィーナ礼拝堂とはまったく異なった外観で設計されている。

内装

システィーナ礼拝堂内部の東壁面と北壁面。

システィーナ礼拝堂二階の天井は、窓上部の壁から始まる丸みの少ないアーチ状の円天井である。この円天井の最下層部分は、それぞれの窓の間にある細い装飾用の付柱から伸びる大きな三角形のペンデンティヴに接している。当初の円天井は、ピエルマッテオ・ダメリア (en:Piermatteo Lauro de’ Manfredi da Amelia) がデザインした、金色の星がちりばめられた鮮やかな青一色で塗装されていた^[6]。床面は建設当初の内部レイアウトに従って、大理石と色石が使用されたコスマテスク様式 (en:Cosmatesque) の飾り石張りとなっている。また、聖枝祭のような重要な式典時にローマ教皇の行列が足を進める箇所には特別な飾りが施されている。

ミーノ・ダ・フィエゾーレ (en:Mino da Fiesole)、アンドレア・ブレーニョ (en:Andrea Bregno)、ジョヴァンニ・ダルマータ (en:Giovanni Dalmata) の手による大理石のトランセンナ（彫刻が施された柵）が室内を大きく二分している^[12]。このトランセンナは祭壇近くの礼拝堂関係者の場所と、巡礼者や礼拝堂を訪れる近隣住民ら一般信徒の場所を隔てるために使用されており、当初は礼拝堂の中心に置かれて礼拝堂関係者と関係者以外に同じ面積が割り当てられていた。しかしながら、ローマ教皇の随行員の増加に伴ってトランセンナが動かされ、一般信徒に与えられる場所は徐々に少なくなっていった。トランセンナの上部には一列に並んだ華美な燭台が置かれており、木製の扉がついている。かつてこの燭台は金箔で覆われており、扉も金箔が貼られた精緻な鉄製の扉だった。このトランセンナを制作した前述の芸術家たちの作品は、『カントリア』や聖歌隊席などの彫刻にも残っている。

ラファエロのタペストリ

『アナニヤの死』、ラファエロが描いた下絵。

ラファエロが描いた下絵をもとに制作されたタペストリ。

システィーナ礼拝堂で開催されるとくに重要な式典では、両側の壁がラファエロが礼拝堂のためにデザインした「聖ペテロの生涯」と「聖パウロの生涯」を描き出したタペストリで覆われる。『福音書』と『使徒行伝』からのエピソードをモチーフとしたもので、ラファエロが描いたデザイン用の下絵『ラファエロのカルトン』10点のうち現存する7点をイギリス王家のロイヤル・コレクションが所蔵しており、1865年からロンドンのヴィクトリア&アルバート博物館で展示されている^[13]。このラファエロのタペストリは1527年のローマ略奪で収奪されており、貴金属が剥ぎ取られヨーロッパ中に散逸してしまっていた。20世紀後半にシスティーナ礼拝堂に戻され（新しく作り直されたタペストリもある）、1983年から元通りシスティーナ礼拝堂で使用されるようになった。

内部装飾

三層に別れたシスティーナ礼拝堂の内部壁面。下から、金銀の布を描いたフレスコ画、キリストの生涯を描いたフレスコ画、歴代ローマ教皇の肖像とキリストの祖先たち。

システィーナ礼拝堂の内部壁面は三層に大別できる。下層は金銀の布が描かれたフレスコ画である。中層には互いを補完しあう「モーセの生涯の物語」と「キリストの生涯の物語」のフレスコ画がある。これらのフレスコ画は1480年にローマ教皇シクストゥス4世が依頼したもので、ギルランダイオ、ボッティチェッリ、ペルジーノ、ロッセッリ (en:Cosimo Roselli) らが、それぞれが率いていた工房の弟子たちとともに制作に当たった。おそらく当時すでにローマにあって、システィーナ礼拝堂内部装飾の責任者になっていたと考えられているペルジーノのもとに集められた当時のフィレンツェを代表する画家たちは、1480年10月27日にフィレンツェを発ってローマへと向かい、1481年の初春から壁画制作を開始している。フィレンツェの画家たちがシスティーナ礼拝堂の内部装飾に任命された背景には、当時シクストゥス4世と仲違いしていた、フィレンツェの支配者ロレンツォ・デ・メディチとの関係修復という意味合いもあった。上層はさらに上下に二分割できる。下部には歴代ローマ教皇の肖像が等身大で描かれている。上部のルネットにはミケランジェロの天井画の一部として、キリストの祖先とされる歴史上の人物たちが描かれている。

ミケランジェロがローマ教皇ユリウス2世の命でシスティーナ礼拝堂天井画を描いたのは1508年から1512年にかけてである。この天井画には『創世記』のエピソードから「天地創造」、「アダムとイヴ」、「失楽園」など9点のフレスコ画が描かれている。円天井を支える三角形のペンデンティヴには、神が救世主キリストを遣わすことを預言した『旧約聖書』の7人の預言者と古代の巫女（シビュラ）が描かれている。

1515年に、ローマ教皇レオ10世の命で、ラファエロが礼拝堂壁面最下層を飾る10点のタペストリをデザインした^[14]。当時のラファエロは25歳にしてフィレンツェではすでに多くの富裕なパトロンを持つ有力な芸術家だった。そしてラファエロは野心ある若者であり、ローマ教皇をパトロンに持つという栄誉を希求していた^[15]。ローマ教皇に気に入られ、活気溢れるローマに魅せられたラファエロは、その後の生涯をローマで送ることになる。

ラファエロはこのシスティーナ礼拝堂のタペストリ制作依頼を、自身の作品とミケランジェロの作品とを比較する絶好の機会だと見なしていた。またラファエロにタペストリ制作を命じたレオ10世にも、前任のローマ教皇ユリウス2世がミケランジェロに描かせた天井画への対抗心があったと考えられている^[16]。ミケランジェロがタペストリのモチーフとしたのは『使徒行伝』で、1515年半ばからデザインの制作が開始された。織り上げるためにブリュッセルに送られたタペストリのデザインは非常に大規模なもので、ピーテル・ファン・アールストの工房で4年間をかけて完成している^[17]。

フレスコ画

ボッティチェッリとその工房が描いた『モーセの試練』。

南壁面

システィーナ礼拝堂の南壁面は、1481年から1482年にかけて描かれた「モーセの生涯の物語」で装飾されている。主祭壇から順に以下の作品となっている。

• 『モーセのエジプト脱出』 – ペルジーノとその弟子作
• 『モーセの試練』 – ボッティチェッリとその工房作
• 『紅海横断』 – ロッセッリとギルランダイオまたはビアッジョ・ダントーニオ (en:Biagio d’Antonio) 作
• 『シナイ山から下山したモーゼ』 – ロッセッリまたはピエロ・ディ・コジモ作
• 『反逆者たちの懲罰』 – ボッティチェッリ作
• 『モーゼの死と遺言』 – シニョレッリとバルトロメオ・デッラ・ガッタ (en:Bartolomeo della Gatta)

北壁面

システィーナ礼拝堂の南壁面は、1481年から1482年にかけて描かれた「キリストの生涯の物語」で装飾されている。

• 『キリストの洗礼』 – ペルジーノとその弟子作
• 『キリストの誘惑』 – ボッティチェッリ作
• 『使徒の改宗』 – ギルランダイオ作
• 『聖ペテロへの天国の鍵の授与』 – ペルジーノ作
• 『最後の晩餐』 – ロッセッリ作

西壁面

• 『キリストの復活』 – ヘンドリク・ファン・デン・ブルック作（1572年）、ギルランダイオのフレスコ画に上描き
• 『モーセの遺体をめぐる争い』 – マッテオ・ダ・レッチェ作（1574年）、シニョレッリのフレスコ画に上描き

壁面フレスコ画

• 

  『反逆者たちの懲罰』
  （ボッティチェッリ）

• 

  『キリストの洗礼』
  （ペルジーノとその弟子）

• 

  『使徒の改宗』
  （ギルランダイオ）

• 

  『聖ペテロへの天国の鍵の授与』
  （ペルジーノ）

• 

  『最後の晩餐』
  （ロッセッリ）

ミケランジェロのフレスコ画

天井画

ミケランジェロが描いたシスティーナ礼拝堂天井画『アダムの創造』。神が人間を創造し、命を与えるエピソードの象徴となっている、システィーナ礼拝堂のフレスコ画の中でも世界的にもっとも有名な作品である。

詳細は「システィーナ礼拝堂天井画」を参照

ミケランジェロがローマ教皇ユリウス2世にシスティーナ礼拝堂天井画の描き直しを命じられたのは1508年だった。それまで、天井とヴォールトには金の星々がきらめく青い空が描かれていた^[6]。この縦40m、横13mで、総面積は460平方メートルという大規模な天井画^[18]の制作は1508年に開始され、1512年11月2日に完成した^[19]。

当初ミケランジェロはユリウス2世からのこの壮大な天井画制作依頼を嫌がり、ユリウス2世が考えていた計画の下では作業をしたくないと断っている。ミケランジェロは自身を画家ではなく彫刻家であると自負しており、このような大規模で実現困難な絵画制作がまわってきたのは、失敗させて自分を陥れるための罠なのではないかと疑ってさえいた。ミケランジェロにとってみれば、システィーナ礼拝堂の絵画制作依頼は、数年前から専念していた大理石彫刻の制作の邪魔にしか思えなかったのである^[20]。

ミケランジェロが天井画のデザインとして採用したのは、依頼主のユリウス2世が持っていたシスティーナ礼拝堂の天井に空を背景とした十二使徒を描きだすという構想^[21]からかけ離れた、はるかに複雑なものだった。ミケランジェロが天井画に『創世記』を中心とした構成に変更した理由は定かではない。この天井画に対して影響を与えたような過去の作品は存在せず、ミケランジェロが描きあげたこの絵画はそれまでの絵画作品とは隔絶したものといえる^[22]。

ユリウス2世は、天井に絵を描くための足場制作をミケランジェロ自身に任せた。ミケランジェロはシスティーナ礼拝堂の壁面、窓最上部とほぼ同じ高さの箇所に穴を開けて腕木を渡し、その上に平らな板を載せて足場とした。そしてこの板に仰向けとなって天井画を描いたといわれている^[23]。 システィーナ礼拝堂の天井中央部分に描かれているのは『旧約聖書』に記された『創世記』の9つのエピソードで、これら9つのエピソードはさらに大きく3つの物語に分けることができる^[24]。神による天地創造の物語、神による最初の人間であるアダムとイヴの人類創造と神にそむいたアダムとイヴがエデンの園から追放される失楽園の物語、そして大洪水とノア一族」の物語である。作品の構成としては、必ずしも『創世記』に記述されている時系列順とはなっていない。9つのエピソードからなる3つの場面は互いの内容を補完しあう構成となっており、これは中世の絵画作品やステンドグラスでよく用いられた技法である^[25]。

天井中央部に描かれている『創世記』のエピソードは、主祭壇から後陣に向かって以下の順番になっている。

• 『光と闇の分離』
• 『太陽、月、植物の創造』
• 『大地と水の分離』
• 『アダムの創造』
• 『エヴァの創造』
• 『原罪と楽園追放』
• 『ノアの燔祭』
• 『大洪水』
• 『ノアの泥酔』

システィーナ礼拝堂の左右それぞれ5箇所と後陣側と主祭壇側それぞれ1箇所にあるペンデンティヴ部分には、この天井画の中で最も大きな人物像が描かれている。描かれているのはメシアの到来、あるいは到来するメシアの容貌を預言したとされる12名の人物たちである。これら12名のうち7名は『旧約聖書』に記された男性預言者で、残る5名がシビュラと呼ばれる古代の女性巫女となっている。主祭壇側には預言者ヨナが、後陣側には預言者ゼカリヤがそれぞれ描かれている。残りの10名は左右に分かれて男女交互に描かれており、プットー（幼い天使）が支える彩色大理石板に刻まれた銘文によって誰が描かれているのかを識別することができる。主祭壇上部のヨナから時計回りに以下の人物像が描かれている。

• 『ヨナ』 – 主祭壇上部
• 『エレミヤ』
• 『ペルシアの巫女』 (en:Persian Sibyl)
• 『エゼキエル』
• 『エリュトレイアの巫女』 (en:Erythraean Sibyl)
• 『ヨエル』
• 『ゼカリヤ』 – 後陣上部
• 『デルフォイの巫女』 (en:Delphic Sibyl)
• 『イザヤ』
• 『クエマの巫女』 (en:Cumaean Sibyl)
• 『ダニエル』
• 『リビアの巫女』 (en:Libyan Sibyl)

建物四隅にもペンデンティヴがあり、ミケランジェロはこの部分に『旧約聖書』に登場するユダヤの偉人とされるモーセ、エステル、ダヴィデ、ユディトによるイスラエルの民救済のエピソードを描いている。

• 青銅の蛇
• ハマンの処刑
• ダヴィデとゴリアテ
• ユディトとホロフェルネス

これらのほかに、14箇所のアーチ状のルネット部分と、8箇所の三角状のスパンドレル (en:Spandrel) 部分には、アブラハムらキリストの祖先とされている人物とその家族が描かれている。

天井中央部分の『創世記』

• 

  『太陽、月、植物の創造』

• 

  『イヴの創造』

• 

  『原罪と楽園追放』

• 

  『ノアの燔祭』

• 

  『大洪水』

ペンデンティヴ部分の預言者と巫女

• 

  『ヨナ』

• 

  『エリュトレイアの巫女』

• 

  『ゼカリヤ』

• 

  『デルフォイの巫女』

• 

  『イザヤ』

最後の審判

システィーナ礼拝堂主祭壇の『最後の審判』。

詳細は「最後の審判 (ミケランジェロ)」を参照

ミケランジェロは、ローマ教皇クレメンス7世と、後継のローマ教皇パウルス3世の命で、1533年から1541年にかけて主祭壇背後の壁に『最後の審判』を描いた^[26]。これはローマのルネサンス芸術崩壊の引き金となった、神聖ローマ皇帝カール5世の軍勢がローマに侵攻したいわゆるローマ略奪（1527年5月）よりも後年で、トリエント公会議（1545年）の直前となる時期にあたる。『最後の審判』はシスティーナ礼拝堂主祭壇の後壁面全体に描かれた、1370cm × 1200cmという非常に大規模な作品で、キリストの再臨と現世の終末を、天使に囲まれたキリストが生前の行いによって人々の魂を裁いている情景となっている。

この作品は、枢機卿オリヴィエーロ・カラファ (en:Cardinal Carafa) とミケランジェロとの間にちょっとした騒動を巻き起こした。ミケランジェロが裸体の人物像を多く描いたことが、不道徳で猥雑であると非難されたのである。そして『最後の審判』の裸体を隠そうという「イチジクの葉運動」と呼ばれる一種の検閲運動が、カラファとマントヴァ公使セルニーニによって開始された。ローマ教皇の儀典長ビアジョ・ダ・チェゼーナも「このうえなく下品であり、聖なる場所にこのような裸体画があってはならない。恥ずべき作品で、ローマ教皇の礼拝堂には相応しくなく、公衆浴場か酒場に飾るべきだ」と酷評している^[27]。ミケランジェロは不仲だったチェザーナを地獄の裁判官ミノスとして『最後の審判』に描いた。チェザーナがこのことについてパウルス3世に不平をもらすと、ローマ教皇の権威は地獄にまでは及ばないと返されたといわれている^[28]。オリジナルの『最後の審判』に描かれていた人物の局部は、後年になって「ズボンの画家 (Il Braghettone )」と嘲笑めいたあだ名をつけられたダニエレ・ダ・ヴォルテッラによって布で覆われた状態で上描きされた^[29]、

フレスコ画修復

詳細は「システィーナ礼拝堂壁画修復」を参照

修復前後のダニエル。

システィーナ礼拝堂のフレスコ画、とくにミケランジェロが描いた天井画は過去に何度も修復されており、もっとも近年で大規模な修復作業が、1979年に開始された試験的な修復を経て1980年6月から1999年12月にかけて実施された。修復作業を手がけたのはジャンルイージ・コラルッチ、マウリツィオ・ロッシ、ピエルジョルジョ・ボネッティ、ブルーノ・バラッティらからなるチームだった^[30]。修復作業の様子は克明に記録されており、記録写真を担当したのは日本テレビから嘱託された美術写真家の岡村崔である^[30]。

最初に修復対象となったのはミケランジェロの天井画のルネット部分で、1984年に完了している。天井画全体の修復が完了したのは1989年12月のことで、引き続きミケランジェロの『最後の審判』の修復が開始された。フレスコ画全体の修復作業の様子がローマ教皇ヨハネ・パウロ2世に公開されたのは、全体の完成間近の1994年4月8日だった^[31]。最後に修復された箇所はボッティチェッリ、ギルランダイオ、ペルジーノらが描いた壁面のフレスコ画で、1999年12月11日になって公開された^[32] 。

修復後、それまでロウソクの煙による煤などの影響でほとんどモノクロームに見えるまでに色褪せていた色彩は鮮やかにきらめき、春を思わせる薄いピンク色、青リンゴ色、色鮮やかな黄色、空色などの彩色がパールグレイの壁面と好対照を成している。この修復により、今まで煤に覆われていたフレスコ画はもとの彩りを取り戻したのである^[32]。しかしながら、この修復作業と結果にも賛否両論が存在する。否定派はオリジナルのミケランジェロのフレスコ画に表現されていた、明暗や陰影、微細な表現などが汚れの除去とともに失われてしまったと主張している^[33]。

複製

日本・徳島県鳴門市の大塚国際美術館には、システィーナ礼拝堂天井画を陶板にて原寸大で再現した展示がある。 陶板による複製画は、オリジナル作品とは違い、2000年以上にわたってそのままの色と姿で残るので、これからの文化財の記録保存のあり方に大いに貢献するといわれている。現にオリジナルの礼拝堂天井画は近年劣化に悩まされており、現在では入場制限も検討されている^[34]。

脚注

1. ^ ^a b c d Ekelund, Hébert & Tollison 2006, p. 313
2. ^ “Vatican City”. Whc.unesco.org. 2011年8月9日閲覧。
3. ^ Monfasani, John (1983), “A Description of the Sistine Chapel under Pope Sixtus IV”, Artibus et Historiae (IRSA s.c.) 4 (7): 9–18, doi:10.2307/1483178, ISSN 0391-9064, JSTOR 1483178.
4. ^ ^a b Pietrangeli 1986, p. 28
5. ^ Pietrangeli 1986, p. 24
6. ^ ^a b c d John Shearman, « The Chapel of Sixtus IV ». In Pietrangeli 1986
7. ^ Stevens, Abel & Floy, James. « Allegri’s Miserere ». The National Magazine, Carlton & Phillip, 1854. 531.
8. ^ Saunders, Fr. William P. « The Path to the Papacy« . Arlington Catholic Herald, 17 March 2005. Retrieved on 2 June 2008.
9. ^ Chambers, D. S. (1978), “Papal Conclaves and Prophetic Mystery in the Sistine Chapel”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes (The Warburg Institute) 41: 322–326, doi:10.2307/750878, JSTOR 750878.
10. ^ Domus Sanctae Marthae & The New Urns Used in the Election of the Pope from EWTN
11. ^ Campbell, Ian (1981), “The New St Peter’s: Basilica or Temple?”, Oxford Art Journal 4 (1): 3–8, doi:10.1093/oxartj/4.1.3, ISSN 0142-6540検索された 2014-06-06
12. ^ Hersey 1993, p. 180
13. ^ Cheney, Iris. Review of « Raphael’s Cartoons in the Collection of Her Majesty The Queen and the Tapestries for the Sistine Chapel » by John Shearman ». The Art Bulletin, Volume 56, No. 4, December 1974. 607–609.
14. ^ Talvacchia 2007, p. 150
15. ^ Talvacchia 2007, p. 80
16. ^ Hall, Marcia B. Rome: Artistic Centers of the Italian Renaissance. London: Cambridge University Press 18 April 2005. 138.
17. ^ Talvacchia 2007, p. 152
18. ^ Michelangelo – The Sistine Chapel Ceiling, « Seven Common Questions About the Frescoes »
19. ^ Graham-Dixon 2008, p. 2
20. ^ Graham-Dixon 2008, p. 1
21. ^ Giacometti, Massimo (1986). The Sistine Chapel.
22. ^ Graham-Dixon 2008, p. xii
23. ^ Michelangelo 1999, pp. 64–66
24. ^ Paoletti and Radke pp. 402 – 403
25. ^ See en:Poor Man’s Bible
26. ^ Stollhans, Cynthia (1988), “Michelangelo’s Nude Saint Catherine of Alexandria”, Woman’s Art Journal (Woman’s Art, Inc.) 19 (1): 26–30, doi:10.2307/1358651, ISSN 02707993, JSTOR 1358651.
27. ^ Vasari 1987, p. 379
28. ^ Reported by Lodovico Domenichi in Historia di detti et fatti notabili di diversi Principi & huommi privati moderni (1556), p. 668
29. ^ Simons, Marlise (19 June 1991), “Vatican Restorers Are Ready for ‘Last Judgment”, New York Times 2009年3月7日閲覧。
30. ^ ^a b Carlo Pietrangeli, Foreword to The Sistine Chapel, ed. Massimo Giacometti. (1986) Harmony Books, ISBN 0-517-56274-X
31. ^ “Homily preached by the Holy Father John Paul II at the mass of to celebrate the unveiling of the restorations of Michelangelo’s frescoes in the Sistine Chapel”. Vatican Publishing House (1994年4月8日). 2007年9月28日閲覧。
32. ^ ^a b Pietrangeli 1994
33. ^ Beck (1995)
34. ^ バチカン、システィーナ礼拝堂の入場制限を検討

参考文献

• Deimling, Barbara (2000), Sandro Botticelli 1444/45-1510, Köln: Taschen, ISBN 3-8228-5992-3
• Earls, Irene (1987), Renaissance Art: A Topical Dictionary, Westport: Greenwood Press, ISBN 0-313-24658-0
• Ekelund, Robert B.; Hébert, Robert F.; Tollison, Robert D. (2006), The Marketplace of Christianity, Cambridge: MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-05082-X
• Graham-Dixon, Andrew (2008), Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN 0-297-85365-1
• Hersey, George (1993), High Renaissance Art in St. Peter’s and the Vatican, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0-226-32782-5
• Michelangelo (1999), Bull, George, ed., Michelangelo, Life, Letters, and Poetry, Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-283770-2
• Pietrangeli, Carlo, ed. (1986), The Sistine Chapel, New York: Harmony Books, ISBN 0-517-56274-X
• Seymour, Charles (1972), Michelangelo, the Sistine Chapel Ceiling: illustrations, introductory essays, backgrounds and sources, critical essay, New York: W. W. Norton, ISBN 0-393-04319-3
• Stinger, Charles (1998), The Renaissance in Rome, Bloomington: Indianapolis, ISBN 0-253-21208-1
• Talvacchia, Bette (2007), Raphael, Oxford Oxfordshire: Phaidon Press, ISBN 978-0-7148-4786-3
• Vasari, Giorgio (1987), The Lives of the Artists, George Bull, New York: Penguin Books, ISBN 0-14-044500-5
• Wright, Lawrence (1983), Perspective in Perspective, London: Routledge & K. Paul, ISBN 0-7100-0791-4
• Pietrangeli, Hirst and Colalucci, eds. (1994). The Sistine Chapel: A Glorious Restoration. Italy, Harry N Abrams
• James Beck and Michael Daley, Art Restoration, the Culture, the Business and the Scandal, W.W. Norton, 1995. ISBN 0-393-31297-6

関連文献

• Ettlinger, Leopold (1965), The Sistine Chapel before Michelangelo: Religious Imagery and Papal Primacy, Oxford: Clarendon Press, OCLC 230168041
• King, Ross (2003), Michelangelo & the Pope’s Ceiling, New York: Penguin Books, ISBN 0-14-200369-7
• Lewine, Carol (1993), The Sistine Chapel Walls and the Roman Liturgy, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, ISBN 0-271-00792-3
• Hirst, Michael; Colalucci, Gianluigi; Mancinelli, Fabrizio; Shearman, John; Winner, Matthias; Maeder, Edward; De Vecchi, Pierluigi; Nazzareno, Gabrielli et al. (1994), Pietrangeli, Carlo, ed., The Sistine Chapel: A Glorious Restoration, Takashi Okamura (photographer), New York: H.N. Abrams, ISBN 0-8109-3840-5
• Pfeiffer, Heinrich (2007) (German), Die Sixtinische Kapelle neu entdeckt, Stuttgart: Belser, ISBN 978-0-8109-3840-3
• Stone, Irving (2004), The Agony and the Ecstasy, London: Nal Trade, ISBN 0-451-21323-8. Previously publish by Doubleday in 1961.
• Blech, Benjamin; Doliner, Roy (2008), The Sistine Secrets: Michelangelo’s Forbidden Messages in the Heart of the Vatican, New York: HarperOne, ISBN 978-0-06-146904-6
• Efetov, Konstantin (2006), A shocking secret of the Sistine Chapel, Simferopol: CSMU Press, ISBN 966-2969-17-9
• Paoletti, John T.; Radke, Gary M. (2005). Art in Renaissance Italy, Laurence King. ISBN 1-85669-439-9

関連項目

ウィキメディア・コモンズには、システィーナ礼拝堂に関連するメディアがあります。

• ルネサンス期のイタリア絵画
• ルネサンス美術
• バチカン宮殿
• ローマ教皇
• 大塚国際美術館 – システィーナ礼拝堂内部が複製陶板画で再現されている

外部リンク

• Vatican Museums Online: Sistine Chapel A virtual detailed tour of the frescoes and panels
• High-resolution interactive virtual tour of the Sistine Chapel
• Web Gallery of Art: Visit to the Sistine Chapel in Vatican
• BBC News: Sistine Chapel Restored (1999)
• The Restoration of the Sistine Chapel: Right or Wrong?
• www.christusrex.org Capella Sistina Master Plan & Pictures

[表示] 表 話 編 歴 ローマ遺跡(一覧)

典拠管理 WorldCat VIAF: 268642532 LCCN: n96096549 GND: 4104970-6 BNF: cb139022841 (データ) NLA: 36437812

カテゴリ:

• システィーナ礼拝堂
• バチカンの世界遺産
• キリスト教建築物の世界遺産

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixtinische_Kapelle

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com