now of St. Bartholomew, into the island, which is also dedicated to that
saint; considerable vestiges of the ancient bridge remain. It was built
in the 788th year of Rome, but restored in 368 of the Christian era. In
a convent in the island, we find a waxen bust of one of the monks, who
was a friend of Canova, made by that artist. It is admirably executed,
and coloured like nature, but the stillness of the open blue eyes
represents death, and not life. In the garden of the same convent, and
from the shore just below it, you may see the small remnants of the
temple of Æsculapius, which was built in the form of a ship. Something
of this shape is still distinguishable, and also a portion of the
serpent. The temple of Vesta, the mouth of the Cloaca maxima, and Ponte
Rotto, unite into a fine composition, as seen from the point of the
island. After crossing the other branch of the Tiber, on the Ponte di
Quattro Capi, which retains in its piers some fragments of the Pons
Fabricius, built in 733 of Rome; we may visit the Palazzo Mattei, which
I notice, not for its architecture, nor for its paintings, though it
contains a fine collection, but for the great quantity of bas-reliefs,
built up in the walls. They would make an interesting museum, if put
together in a place where they were well seen; but here, besides being
exposed to the injuries of the weather, they are almost lost as separate
objects, and they take away from what beauty there is in the
architecture. In the lower court are some valuable fragments of
architectural ornament, built up in the same manner, and in particular,
two semicircular windows, where the rich foliage which occupies great
part of the opening, shews that the ancients knew how to produce an
effect, somewhat similar to that of the tracery in our Gothic windows,
and in some respects superior to it, without at all departing from the
character of their own architecture.
I have not mentioned the Church of San Carlo a’ Catinari, which however
is a fine church, in the form of a Greek cross, or rather a Latin cross
reversed, for the choir forms a longer arm than the others, and even
these, being nearly equal to the width of the dome, are rather too deep.
The gilding and ornament is spotty, but the frescos of Domenichino are
very good, not equal however, to those at Sant Andrea.
In our way home we may look at the Church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva,
in front of which is a paltry little obelisk, mounted upon the back of
an elephant. The church was built about 1370, and retains a good deal of
the work of that period, but it is only a sort of ill-understood Gothic.
This church contains the celebrated statue of our Saviour supporting his
cross, by Michael Angelo. Milizia calls it a ruffian, which however it
is not; though the action is rather strong. The expression of the head
in some points of view is fine, and even sublime; but not equally so in
all; the muscles are large and flabby.
In the annexed convent is a library, said to be one of the richest in
Italy; it was founded by Cardinal Casanatta, who left a considerable sum
for its support, but like other things at Rome, it is a century behind
London and Paris, and the _Index expurgatorius_ is a great enemy to all
public libraries.
Having given you an account of what is found in the inside of this great
city, I shall proceed to the walls which enclose it, beginning with the
Porta del Popolo, for the small part between this and the river presents
no object of interest. This gate, according to the guide-books, was
re-built from a design by Michael Angelo, and executed under the
direction of Vignola; but it is not good, and part of it is more
ancient, for the holes in the external towers, now filled up, but
evidently made in order to get at the metal cramps which fastened the
stones together, attest the antiquity of the lower part.
Turning to the right, the wall, strengthened with buttresses and arched
recesses, forms the support of the Pincian hill. In this part we find
the Muro torto, a great square mass, placed at an angle in the circuit,
and corresponding in construction with the walls, that is, it is of
rubble-work, with a facing of reticulated tufo. It considerably
overhangs its base. There is no opening below, but above there appear to
have been recesses and arches, corresponding with those of the wall.
Antiquaries are not agreed as to what it has been. Beyond these we have
towers and curtains of more modern work, erected for the purpose of city
walls. Here and there a very ragged foundation occurs, which is perhaps
of earlier date, and in one or two places there are blocks of marble,
and other more decisive indications of ancient edifices.
The Porta Pia was opened by Pius the Fourth, in 1561. The designs were
Michael Angelo’s, but it has never been finished, nor would it be
handsome if it were. Here, by way of ornament, we see pateras with linen
hanging over them, said to represent a barber’s basin and towel, and to
have been intended by M. A. Buonarroti as a reproach to his employer for
the lowness of his origin; but conveying a much severer reproach against
M. Angelo himself, if the story be true; but it is exceedingly
improbable.
After this we distinguish the external form of the Prætorian camp, and
the wall is plain and without towers. In one place there are arches in
the upper part, and traces of walls advancing at right angles. After
this is a gateway stopt up, with one large scheme arch below, and six
little arches above. Then comes the Porta San Lorenzo, built in the same
style, perhaps by Aurelian, and repaired in 403, under _the most
unconquered princes_, Arcadius and Honorius, as is recorded by an
inscription. Within this is an arch of the aqueduct of the Aqua Marcia,
repaired successively by Augustus, Titus, and Caracalla. There are
stones disposed pedimentwise over the arch, and one of the ancient
inscriptions runs horizontally across these stones. The walls continue
to be of brick, with many towers, till we arrive at the angle by the
Porta Maggiore, where some ancient aqueducts enter the walls. The Porta
Maggiore is constructed of large blocks of travertine, and consisted
anciently of two arches, as was usual in city gates, and three niches
ornamented internally with cornices and pediments, one between, and one
on each side of the entrances. It is supposed in the first instance to
have formed part of an aqueduct, afterwards built up in the city walls;
and if of five arches of an aqueduct three were filled up, and the two
intermediate ones left open, a similar arrangement would result. Only
one arch is now open, and the one which has been stopped up, does not
seem to correspond exactly either in height or direction, with that
through which the road passes. Two watercourses, the Anio novus and the
Claudia, passed over it anciently, and the Acqua Felice has since been
conducted through it. Three large inscriptions give due honours to
Claudius, Vespasian, and Titus. Just to the north of this gate three
other water-courses enter the wall of the city. The two upper are the
Julia and Tepula, in rubble-work, which rest upon the constructions in
peperino, of the Marcia. Another half buried, supposed to be the Anio
vetus, is seen at the bottom. I hope in a succeeding walk to be able to
give you some further idea of these aqueducts. To the right, as you
issue from the gate, you find the wall made up of an ancient aqueduct,
by filling up the arches; this is also observable on the inside, where,
from the garden containing the temple of Venus and Cupid, you may trace
a considerable portion of the different constructions.
A little after leaving these aqueducts, you arrive at the remains of an
amphitheatre, part of the circuit of which is built up in the walls; it
consists of a range of Corinthian columns with arches between them, all
of brick, and a small fragment of a second range; the brickwork is
pretty well executed, but by no means equal to that of the temple of
Rediculus. It is remarkable that the bricks of the arches are laid to a
centre considerably lower than the centre of the curve. They are redder
and longer than the others.
In this part are various traces of old foundations built up in the
circuit of the wall, and nearer to the Porta San Giovanni, some
reticulated work occurs. This gate is entirely modern, and not of an
architecture to require any attention. Very near to it is another gate
which has been stopped up. After this the walls are of very shabby
brickwork, propt up by buttresses of different dates, and here and there
shewing traces of the old work of walls or sepulchres. Here as I was
making my memoranda, (in May, 1817) I found a poor wretch who was
seeking, if by chance he could find anything which could be eaten, among
the refuse vegetables which the gardeners had thrown over the walls. I
gave him two bajocs, for which he was extremely grateful, and would kiss
my hand. I did not like absolutely to refuse the customary expression of
gratitude, but I quite felt the dirt. This may serve to shew to what a
state the people here are reduced, by the failure, or at least the great
deficiency both of the vintage and the harvest, last year.
The next gate is the Porta Latina, which is shut. There is the fragment
of a brick edifice, just out of the walls, in the style of the temple of
Rediculus, but of the Doric order, with two half columns of brick. In
one place among the old peperino constructions which support the wall,
are appearances which indicate a casing of marble or travertine.
At a small distance is the Porta San Sebastiano, the lower part of which
is of squared blocks of marble, well put together. This projecting part
of the present walls is far beyond the ancient circuit, and the
character of the work is quite different from that of the Porta San
Lorenzo, or Porta Maggiore, but has more affinity with that of the Porta
del Popolo. Above the marble, the towers are carried up square, in
brickwork, but the highest part is circular.
Between this and the Porta San Paolo, besides the usual, or perhaps more
than the usual portion of included fragments, many of which were
probably tombs, we have traces of more recent works, and of the
fortifications of modern times. Beyond the Porta San Paolo, there is no
road under the walls, and I did not attempt to find my way through the
vineyards, to the shores of the Tiber. Inside, however, they exhibit a
series of open arches towards Monte Testaccio, and the _Prati del Popolo
Romano_.
LETTER XXXIII.
NEIGHBOURHOOD OF ROME.
_Rome, May, 1817._
You perhaps imagine, from having heard of the dreary and desolate
Campagna, that there are no agreeable walks about the city, but if you
have formed any such notion, you are very much mistaken. The ground
about Rome is exceedingly well disposed for pleasant scenery; the
country being intersected by several valleys of no great width, each
bounded by steep banks of moderate height, from the top of which you
catch the gently varied line of Monte Albano, and the distant Apennines.
One of these, Monte Velino, is still covered with snow. The Leonessa
held it for a long while; but the highest summit of this part of the
chain, which is the Gran Sasso, rising to an elevation of very nearly
9,000 feet, is not visible from any place near Rome. All these points of
the Apennines are in the Neapolitan territory. Each valley has nearly a
flat bottom, forming rich meadows, which in winter are very wet, and
many of them are at times inundated. Wherever art has interfered to
adorn these slopes, or where some natural patch of wood is suffered to
grow, the effect is highly pleasing, especially if in addition, some
picturesque ruin crown the summit. Sometimes when the eye is elevated
above these slopes, such features enrich the nearer landscape, while the
long lines of the ancient aqueducts give an interest to the middle
distance; but it must be confessed that little advantage is made of this
disposition of the ground, and that the general character of
uncultivated nakedness is far from agreeable.
I will take you in this letter through the Porta del Popolo, and our
first visit shall be to the house or casino, once inhabited by Raphael.
It stands in a garden close by the walls, and is without architectural
ornament, yet it forms a good object; to which the woods of the Villa
Borghese extending behind it, contribute not a little. Within is a
chamber adorned with the most beautiful little fancies, such as one may
suppose would be floating in the mind of a Raphael, and which he might
find pleasure in tracing as they occurred, without using any labour
about them, or working on any predetermined plan. A parcel of delightful
little cherubs have stolen the arrows of Cupid, who is represented
asleep, and they are amusing themselves with shooting at a target; there
are also four rounds with female heads, one of which is particularly
beautiful. Other figures seated among the arabesques are highly
graceful, and there is in all so much life and nature, that it is quite
a pleasure to look at them.
Returning from this we pass into the Villa Borghese, through a gateway
whose piers are copied from two sepulchres which have been supposed to
mark the entrance to Adrian’s villa, near Tivoli. These are surmounted
by two eagles of a fine, broad, noble character. The villa itself is a
garden or pleasure ground, said to be three miles in circumference, with
shady walks, which we found delightful as early as the 4th February, and
tall stone pines scattered about the more open parts. These trees, and
the Ilices are the most important circumstances in the beauty of the
place. There is a pretty lake, and a considerable variety of ground and
of scenery; and several buildings, not perhaps very beautiful in
themselves, but assisting the general character of the place. Art
appears everywhere, but not obtrusively, and without pretence. The upper
casino, if not beautiful on the outside, produces at least a rich and
magnificent effect. The general disposition is good, but the roofs are
not well managed, and the middle is too high; it looks better, as do
most of these over-ornamented fronts, in reality, than in a drawing or
engraving, because the artist almost always makes the ornaments too
prominent. The gallery within is a noble room, about 65 feet long, 30
broad, and 33 high; the enrichments are gold and white, on chocolate and
blue. Here was once a superb collection of antiques, but it has been
purchased by the French government, and now forms a large part of the
collection of the Louvre. Bernini’s figures remain, but they are too
affected to please; there are also some landscapes and other paintings
of no great merit, in the different rooms, but the apartments themselves
are of handsome proportions and well disposed. Returning almost to the
Porta del Popolo, and thence keeping along the Via Flaminia, we find the
Villa Poniatowski, very pleasant and containing a good many antiques,
but not of great value; there are a great number of fancy capitals,
variations of the Corinthian, some of which are good, but more bad or
indifferent.
A little farther is the Villa Giulia, which I have already described;
and there is another edifice of simple and not unpleasing architecture,
attributed to Antonio Sangallo, also belonging to a villa or vigna
Giulia. By these, a lane called Via dell’ Arco Scuro, leads to the Aqua
Acetosa, a mineral spring on the banks of the Tiber, having very much
the taste of ink. I have also mentioned the chapel of St. Andrew, by
Vignola, which is the next object in following the road. A little before
arriving at the Ponte Molle, we find another chapel of St. Andrew, or
rather a monument erected on the spot, where according to tradition,
Pius II., in 1463, met the head of the apostle on its arrival at Rome.
Upon a square basement, whose height is probably rather greater than its
width, is a little edifice with a column in each angle, a doorway
between them in each face, and a pediment above; the four fronts being
all precisely alike. Over this is an octagonal drum of very small
height, and a little, scaly cupola, surmounted by a cross. The
composition is simple and pleasing, for a little thing, but it would not
do for a large one.
The Ponte Molle, the ancient Pons Milvius, is the uppermost of the
ancient bridges about Rome over the Tiber. It was originally built in
the year of Rome 645; but it is doubtful if anything we see remaining be
of that period. Yet there is some ancient work in the piers, which is
easily distinguished from the later masonry of the arches, attributed to
Nicolas V. Till 1805 it was encumbered by an inconvenient tower at one
end; but being at that time damaged by an inundation, the road was
straightened, and made more commodious, and the tower converted into a
sort of triumphal arch; but it boasts no beauty. After crossing the
bridge we will take the right hand road up the hill, which coasts the
valley of the Tiber. At the distance of about two miles, we again
descend, and the road is cut into the hill, shewing it to consist of a
gravel principally composed of rounded pebbles of an argillaceous
limestone; near the bottom is the Torre di Quinto, standing, not upon
this gravel, but upon a fresh water limestone, like the travertine, or
the deposit of the Tartar lake, with similar indications of having been
formed on reeds, twigs, &c. This again rests on a volcanic tufo, very
unequal in substance and surface. The lower part of the limestone
includes numerous fragments of this tufo, but there are none of them in
the upper part of the bed. The tower itself is of the middle ages.
Beyond the little valley which succeeds, we find a spur of similar
limestone, resting on tufo. We cannot distinctly see this pass under the
mass of lava, or peperino, or tufo, which forms the next hill, but from
its position we may suppose this to be the case. This mass forms a
precipice perhaps in some parts 100 feet high, immediately above the
road, which here keeps the valley; it exhibits considerable tendency to
perpendicular fissures. The bottom of this bed is exhibited in three
different places; in the first it rests upon a calcareous gravel, like
that of the opposite hill; in the second, on a softish uniform
sandstone, which, whether it be volcanic or not, I cannot tell; in the
third, on a soft peperino, very different from the mass above, or from
anything else in the neighbourhood. In all these, the line of separation
is perfectly distinct. A grotto, the tomb of the family of Naso, usually
called the tomb of Ovid, is worked in the sandstone. It is adorned with
ancient paintings on stucco. A little farther are some other tombs of
considerable magnitude; one of them appears to have been a pyramid, or
cone, on a square basement. Another was circular externally, with twelve
niches, or perhaps eleven niches and a door, and a Greek cross within. A
third exhibits merely foundations, nearly level with the plain. Still
farther is another pyramidal tomb, which I did not visit.
After satisfying our curiosity here, we return by the same road to the
Ponte Molle; afterwards keeping the right bank of the river, and passing
through some vineyards still more to the right, we ascend the hill to
the Villa Madama. The building, which has never been finished, presents
its flank to the side of the hill; a deep loggia in the garden front,
has been ornamented with paintings by Giulio Romano, who is also the
reputed architect of the villa. This deep loggia, too complicated
perhaps in its form, is nevertheless very elegant, and the terrace
garden beyond it offers a fine view of the Campagna. All is now
neglected and forlorn.
Between this and Rome we may cross Monte Mario, so called, not from the
Roman general, but from a villa on the summit, belonging at one time to
a certain Mario Mellini. This is the highest hill in the immediate
neighbourhood of Rome, and a noble terrace shaded with cypresses
commands a magnificent view both of the city and country, from the
Apennines to the Mediterranean. If instead of following the road from
this place to Rome, we keep a little to the right, we shall find
ourselves in the Valle d’ Inferno. Whether this has its name from the
mal aria, or from its being infested with robbers, I shall not undertake
to decide. It certainly is not from the character of the scenery, which
is that of a green secluded valley, winding between steep woody banks of
small elevation. If it had not been for its botany I should never have
visited it. We re-enter Rome by the Porta Angelica.
[Illustration:
A.B. Clayton del. from Sketches by J. Woods Edwards. Sculp
PONTE SALARIA.
_London. Published by J & A. Arch, Cornhill. March 1^{st}. 1828._ ]
Our next walk shall be out of the Porta Salaria, on which road the first
object is the Villa Albani. The ground floor of the principal building
presents a range of ten Ionic pilasters, and in each interpilaster is an
arch supported on two small columns. Above, are two ranges of windows,
of which the upper ones are circular; and Corinthian pilasters. The
distribution of the wings is exactly like that of the lower part of the
centre, but on a smaller scale. It must be acknowledged that the masses
are well proportioned and finely disposed; this is attributed to the
cardinal for whom the villa was made. But the details are bad; for this
the architect is answerable. In the inside, the great saloon is a very
rich and beautiful room, about 60 feet long, 20 wide, and 30 high. The
cabinets are rather too small, but they are handsome rooms, each with a
single light. Opposite to this is the café, where there is an open
semicircular gallery with Doric pilasters, and eleven arches on Doric
columns disposed like those of the principal building. Here again the
general proportions are good, and the details bad. There are some other
smaller edifices, which I shall not particularize; and it does not come
into my plan to attempt the description of the noble collection of
marbles which this villa contains. They tell you of hundreds taken away
by the French, of which eleven I think, have been restored, but the
number is still immense. The views from this villa are magnificent, and
on more than one occasion I have seen from these gardens, the Apennines
lighted up by the setting sun, in exquisite beauty.
The Ponte Salario is said to have been ruined by Totila, and restored by
Narses, but the inscriptions which commemorated those events were lost
in 1798, when the bridge was cut by the retreating Neapolitans. It
consists of one large arch, perhaps 90 feet wide, and two small ones,
one of which is now filled up. The ancient work seems to have been of
peperino, the repairs are of travertine, brick, and rubble. Some of the
stones of the parapet are still remaining; they are formed thus,
[Illustration: Illustration of parapet]
the middle being a sort of pyramid. Beyond this bridge there is a tomb
transformed into a tower, and the road leads us to the site of the
ancient Fidene; but I turned to the right after crossing the river, and
kept under the bank which forms the valley, as far as the Ponte
Lamentano, where a large brick arch in the work above, as well as that
of the bridge itself, has the appearance of a Roman construction.
Instead of crossing this bridge, we may turn for a few steps along the
road to the left, as far as the Mons Sacer, interesting from its place
in Roman history, but not in itself a spot distinctly marked either by
nature or art. Just at its foot are the remains of two sepulchres; one,
which has been an edifice of considerable magnificence, surrounded by a
circular colonnade, is ingeniously assigned by the people of Rome to
Menenius Agrippa. He was there in his life-time to tell his parable to
the plebeians, and therefore he must have been buried there. There are
not however, any columns remaining, or anything of much interest in the
fragment. The other is still more ruined.
In spite of their extremely dilapidated state, these fragments render
the walks about Rome very interesting. They abound in all directions,
chiefly on the east of the Tiber, but much more in some places than in
others, and allow full liberty for the imagination to speculate on their
ancient forms and destinations; for though a few conjectures have been
bestowed upon some of them, there is little but conjecture at the best,
and nine tenths of the fragments are without any probable guess at what
they may have been. A large portion were certainly tombs, but of whom,
and of what period, is forgotten.