The Spanish painter Francisco Preciado de la Vega is known primarily as an artist who lived and worked in Rome and administered the activities of Spaniards sent there by the academy in Madrid. He is also distinguished by his multiple tenures as director of the Accademia di San Luca, but his architectural designs are rarely considered. Like his mentor, Sebastiano Conca, Preciado de la Vega engaged in the design of important architectural set pieces, particularly for the Chinea celebrations in Rome 1744-50 (Fagiolo 1997: 127-46; Cornudella i Carre 1997: 102-4). As previously noted in Chapter 2, the Chinea was a particularly important festival as it symbolically represented Neapolitan gratitude to the papacy for the fiefdom of Naples (Gori Sassoli 1994; Moore 1995). After Carlo di Borbone assumed the throne of Naples in 1738, the celebrations took place in the Piazza Farnese directly in front of his mother Elizabeth Farnese’s family palace, with two set pieces erected, one of which was also a pyrotechnic structure. In the early eighteenth century, the majority of set pieces for the Chinea were designed by French pensioners in Rome, so the inclusion of the Spaniard, Preciado de la Vega, in the 1744 celebrations was certainly unusual. Previously the only Spanish artist involved in the celebrations was Miguel Sorello, who engraved many of the designs.
Preciado’s first scheme for the 1744 Chinea, a pastoral scene depicting the history of Aeneas and the Cumaean Sibyl, lacked any kind of architectural artifice or framework (Figure 4.2). Rather, Preciado presents a landscape representing Cumae and the entrance to the sibyl’s grotto, the setting in which the Roman legend codified in Virgil’s Aeneid takes place. Preciado’s contemporary at the French academy, Louis-Joseph Le Lorrain (1715-59), was responsible for the other set piece, a similarly a-tectonic scene depicting Mercury leading a Goddess to Olympus. The two would face each other again in several Chinea festivals, and their designs would move away from paintings to making set pieces. Yet Preciado’s 1744 scheme is not without intrigue, as it was produced just before the famous visit of Carlo di Borbone to Rome, when the Neapolitan monarch met Benedict XIV Lambertini at Ferdinando Fuga’s Coffee-House in the Quirinal Palace gardens on November 3, 1744. The visit, inspired by Charles’ victory over the Imperial troops at Velletri (August 12, 1744) during the War of Austrian Succession, was brilliantly depicted by Giovanni Paolo Panini in a large canvas. Panini’s painting included within the composition images of the Spanish Cardinal Troiano Acquaviva and the Neapolitan ambassador extraordinary Fabrizio Colonna (Urrea Fernandez 2006: 112-15). Acquaviva had mediated on behalf of the Bourbon Court to have the Pope recognize Carlo as the
Figure 4.2 Francisco Preciado de la Vega, Aeneas and the Cuaean Sibyl, Rome (1744). Courtesy NGA, acc. no. 1996.48.5.
Rightful king of Naples and the Two Sicilies, and Colonna of course was the Neapolitan ambassador who annually delivered the Chinea. So the choice of having Francisco Preciado de la Vega design one of the two set pieces for the 1744 celebrations in the Piazza Farnese is a clear indication of the emerging presence of the Bourbon court in Roman politics and culture. Moreover, the Cumaean sibyl’s prophesy that Aeneas would reach the kingdom he sought paralleled Carlo di Borbone’s assumption to the Neapolitan throne. Given the charged political content of the 1744 Chinea, it is not surprising then that Preciado de la Vega would design the set pieces for the celebrations over the next five years.
It should also be noted that Panini considerably altered Fuga’s design for the Coffee House in his famous painting, by adding curved balustrades with vases out front, additional windows in the end bays, a balustrade parapet above with a much more ornamental cartouche at the center, and coupling the Doric pilasters except at the corners, making the whole seem richer than the original modest structure (Rykwert 1980: 341-2). This is surprising, as Panini had painted several of Fuga’s buildings on the Quirinal, as well as his fagade for Santa Maria Maggiore, never altering them. It seems that the issue of what constituted an appropriate scenic backdrop was at the top of Panini’s mind when he depicted the Coffee House, as the building’s severe simplicity was perhaps too plain for the veduta painter. The question between plain or decorative would be a recurring theme in the subsequent Chinea celebrations of the late 1740s, making them some of the most impressive and resonant architectural designs of the eighteenth century.
For the 1745 Chinea, Le Lorrain designed a set piece in the form a triple arch open on four sides, surmounted by a circular tempietto recalling Bernini’s aedicule niche at the Cornaro chapel (dedicated to Saint Teresa of Avila) at Santa Maria della Vittoria. The tempietto had a conical top with a winged victory above, and a coffered dome within. On the lower section, spirally garlanded Ionic columns framed the central arch and lateral sides, and secondary Tuscan columns supported the central arch and side openings. The iconographical program represented the return of Carlo di Borbone to Naples after the victory at Velletri, with appropriate garlands, relief panels, and statuary. What made Le Lorrain’s scheme so noticeable was its architectural restraint, a reductive volume with columnar elements suggesting antique accuracy.
To celebrate the Chinea of June 28-29, 1746, two structures were erected in the Piazza Farnese, one by Le Lorrain and the other by Preciado de la Vega. Le Lorrain’s scheme, a temple dedicated to Minerva, was even more ambitious and restrained. The scheme took the form of a two-story structure consisting of a simple rectangular block set on a high base, with straight flights of stairs leading to porticoes of coupled columns in front and back, and open hemicycle apses along the sides (Figure 4.3).7 The central block was capped by a cylindrical top reminiscent of Castel Sant’Angelo, with a statue of Minerva instead of Michael, from which the pyrotechnics
Figure 4.3 Louis-Joseph Le Lorrain, Chinea, Rome (1746). Courtesy NGA, acc. no. 1996.48.4.
Would explode. The proto-neoclassical forms were mostly stripped of any decoration, except for statuary in the lower niches and above the cornice line, and as a running frieze in the upper cylinder, and the entire set piece seems to have hovered on a cloud.
In contrast, Preciado’s scheme consisted of a compact two-story structure with superimposed pilasters and niches. At the center, a deep-set columnar niche - superimposed on two-stories with an equestrian statue of Carlo di Borbone below and Virtue above - was capped by a broken segmental pediment displaying the crest of Naples (Figure 4.4). Recalling in composition the structure of the Trevi fountain just under construction, Preciado’s scheme was planar, upright, and grammatically accurate with respect to the classical elements. The only major decoration was in the allegorical emblems and statuary that appropriately celebrated the distinct parts of the kingdom of Naples and the Two Sicilies. Curiously, the plinth below the equestrian statue of Carlo contained an image of the three-legged symbol of Sicily, the triskelion, with the Greek inscription lEPOOZ just beneath it on the pavement. The inscription was actually a name and it referred to Hiero II of Syracuse, the wise king who summoned Archimedes to determine how one could measure the relative density of gold and silver, as the king had received a votive gold crown that he was not convinced was pure. Archimides discovered a way to solve the problem while taking a bath, realizing that by dividing the mass of the crown by the volume of water displaced, he could determine the density of the crown and whether it had been made of pure gold or filled with silver. He was so excited by his discovery that he famously proclaimed “eureka” (I’ve found it) and ran through the streets naked with pride. The test was conducted and indeed the crown had been doctored. The story first appeared in Vitruvius’ Ten Books on Architecture, and its inclusion within the allegorical program of Preciado’s Chinea is not without interest. Seen together with the equestrian statue of Carlo, and the figure of Virtue above, the allusion is quite clear. Carlo, like Hiero, was a virtuous man who rose to prince hood from a private station, but he was also wise in a Solomonic sense, as his prudent nature governed his actions as ruler.
Preciado de la Vega’s scheme for the 1746 Chinea has often been criticized as conservative and uninspired, very much in the Late Baroque style of Ferdinando Fuga, whereas the visionary monumentality of Le Lorrain’s set piece has been greatly praised (Harris 1969; Rykwert 1980: 358).8 HOwever, an anonymous etching from the around the same time shows the procession of the Chinea heading towards the Vatican with Le Lorrain’s set piece located opposite the Castel Sant’Angelo, with Saint Peter’s axially visible in the distance.9 THe backdrop is clearly not the Piazza Farnese, though the great palace is seen to the left. Additionally, Le Lorrain’s set piece is not hovering on a cloud in the piazza but rather seems to be part of the procession, as if it were being carried alongside the white horse. Clearly, the image
Figure 4.4 Francisco Preciado de la Vega, Chinea, Rome (1746). Courtesy NGA, acc. no. 1996.48.6.
Is a composite view of the procession from the Piazza Farnese to the Vatican, without making any precise topographical sense. As John Moore (1995: 584) has pointed out, one of the challenges in evaluating Chinea etchings is that the artists who produced them usually worked in their studios rather than in situ. Their representations were in fact re-presentations of events rather than photographic snap shots that accurately documented specific moments. Moreover, as the ephemeral set pieces no longer exist, interpreting their true size and character can often be difficult. The anonymous etching of the Chinea then poses a problem as Le Lorrain’s set piece seems enormous compared to the Farnese fagade, but miniature and cartoon-like compared to the figures in the procession. It is difficult to know which of the two is more accurate, and if it is the latter case, then we could justifiably question how monumental and visionary the French architect’s design really was.
Preciado de la Vega would design four other set pieces for the Chinea celebrations of 1747-50, always depicted in engravings by Miguel Sorrello, and always set opposite those of French pensioners such as Louis-Joseph Le Lorrain, Ennemond-Alexandre Petitot (1727-1801), and Jerome-Charles Bellicard (1726-86). For the 1747 feast, Preciado placed a miniature Castel Sant’Angelo, topped by a white horse - instead of St. Michael - on a large platform base with four octagonal minarets at the corners terminating in Borromini-like spiraling cones. The eclectic structure, symbolizing the orti pensili (hanging gardens) of Campania, was situated on a rock outcropping not unlike his mentor Sebastiano Conca’s set piece to celebrate the birth of the Spanish infante Don Luis in 1727. For the 1748 Chinea, Preciado presented an octagonal two-story pavilion with projecting porticoes on the four angles of the lower story and the Neapolitan crest above. Simple, clear and upright, Preciado’s scheme was framed by statuary groups along the perimeter symbolizing the four regions of the globe. For the 1749 Chinea, Preciado produced a small Bernini-like open pavilion dedicated to Peace, consisting of four single bay Corinthian pediment fronts, and a shallow dome. The little temple stood on clouds surrounded by figures representing the concord brought about by the Bourbons, and at the center, the figure of Peace rested on the armor of her defeated enemies. The final Chinea of 1750 presented a tranquil and easily accessible Mount Vesuvius, symbolizing the royal clemency of the Bourbon court. This would be the last of Preciado’s six schemes, as well as Sorello’s last etching. Thereafter two Italians would dominate the celebrations, the architect Paolo Posi and engraver Giuseppe Vasi, bringing to a close the intense competition between French and Spanish artists.
In general, these designs continued the architectural themes set out in the 1746 set piece, displaying clever variants on contemporary Roman classicism. In contrast, Le Lorrain’s designs for the 1747 and 1748 Chinea celebrations continued his fascination with abstract reductive volumes based on archaeological investigations, signaling an attitude towards stripped classicism that was gaining ground in the middle decades of the eighteenth century, particularly among students at the French academy who Were influenced by Giovanni Battista Piranesi’s studies of antiquities (Oechslin 1978a).10 His unique vision, based on bold reductive volumes and columnar compositions, was unprecedented and certainly intoxicating to students and patrons alike, its immediate influence most evident in the Chinea festival designs of Le Lorrain, Petitot, and Bellicard.
Ennemond-Alexandre Petitot spent four years in Rome before becoming court architect to Carlo di Borbone’s younger brother Philip, Duke of Parma (r. 1748-65), remodeling in 1753 the ducal residence of Colorno where the young Carlo had resided prior to conquering Naples (Bedarida 1989). Petitot’s 1749 Chinea design consisted of an enormous amphitheater on two stories that celebrated the recent discovery of the theater at Herculaneum. Described as an Idea, or imaginary conception, the rusticated lower arcade with four appended porticoes of coupled Ionic columns was surmounted by an uninterrupted ring of engaged Corinthian columns with intermediate statuary niches. A continuous entablature broken only by a winged escutcheon at the center, capped the colossal structure, reinforcing its relentless cerebral quality.
Jerome-Charles Bellicard produced a curious tower design for the 1750 Chinea, set opposite Preciado de la Vega’s Mount Vesuvius. The scheme, also referred to as an Idea, celebrated the new lighthouse and pier to be built in the port of Naples. Composed of two superimposed towers - square and circular in plan - above a rectangular base with four appended portico entrances, the fancy invention rested on a grand fortified pier. Bellicard had arrived in Rome the previous year and had made a journey to Pozzuoli in 1749. He also produced etchings for Piranesi’s Varie vedute di Roma antica e moderna (c. 1748-78). His career took off shortly after the Chinea festival as he was selected to travel in Italy with Abel-Frangois Poisson de Vandieres, the Marquis of Marigny (Gordon 1990). Brother of Mme. de Pompadour, the mistress of Louis XV, Vandieres was designated in 1746 to become the Directeur-General des Batiments, Jardins, Arts, Academies et Manufactures du Roi, effectively becoming the art tzar of France. To that end, in 1749-51 he went on an extended Grand Tour of Italy accompanied by the Abbe Le Blanc, the engraver Charles-Nicolas Cochin II and the architect Jacques-Germain Soufflot, who would become ill and be replaced by Bellicard. Travelling through Naples and the Campania, Bellicard would produce his Observations sur les antiquites de la ville d’Herculanum (1754; in translation Bellicard and Cochin 1756), as well as a remarkable sketchbook of the antiquities from Rome, Campania, and elsewhere in ItalY.11
While it is tempting to take sides with the French architects in the Chinea celebrations of 1746-50, preferring the visionary antico-monumental schemes of the French architects over Preciado de la Vega’s very Roman Late Baroque designs, the theoretical split is somewhat superficial. It is hardly plausible to characterize such figures as Ferdinando Fuga, Sebastiano Conca, and Francisco Preciado de la Vega as conservative and uninspired artists, especially since all three still had their best years before them, particularly in
Naples where, after 1750, Fuga and Conca would receive important royal and private commissions. Moreover, Fuga already experimented with stripped pilasters and simple planar forms in many of his projects in Rome in the 1730s and 40s, such as the so-called manica lunga wing of the Palazzo Quirinale (1731), the nearby Palazzo della Consulta (1732), or the atrium and portal of the church of Santa Cecilia in Trastevere (1741), demonstrating that an architect could be both practical and exuberant at the same time. Likewise, Preciado’s career as a painter would take off at the same time he was designing the Chinea set pieces. In 1748, he was nominated accademico di merito by the Roman academy and his reputation there would only increase in the following decades. If anything then, it seems that Preciado, like many of his contemporaries in architecture and sculpture in the 1730s and 40s, was promoting the grand manner of contemporary Roman classicism over the more pictorial and highly plastic Rococo style of the earlier decades. In this sense, his schemes for the Chinea celebrations have more in common with the archaeological monumentality of the French pensioners’ projects, even if they differ in precedent and temperament.
World History
