Aerial view of the Palazzo (Alison Syme slide collection, FADIS database)
The Palazzo del Te, designed by Giulio Romano, was constructed between 1524 and 1534 for Federico Gonzaga in the outskirts of Mantua. The building is a landmark is how it uses classical elements and challenges what they mean and how they are used.
The building has many elements of antiquity that contribute to its total design. One element many easily recognize as “classical” is the column. The Palazzo del Te uses a rather basic column design: the Tuscan order. Traditional Doric columns are wide, squat, with a ribbed column and a simplistic base and top – or capital, in architectural vernacular. The Tuscan order is even shorter, squatter, and features a smooth column. Romano uses a variety of columns on the façade of the Palazzo, many in the form of the pilaster – or a column that is half or partly attached to the wall. Romano uses pilasters in strange ways – some are halfway rounded out from the wall, and others are almost completely columns with just a small bit attached to the wall.
Façade of Palazzo del Te (Allison Syme slide collection, FADIS database)
Another major element of classical design employed by many Renaissance architects is the finish of “rustication”. Rustication is a measure taken to make the stones on the outside of a building to look older. During the Renaissance, there was an understanding that the materials used to construct a building, found in nature, were connected to an organic energy (Anderson, 2013, page 14) and that rusticated stones were rough cut to allow “architects to express the vital character of the natural world in buildings themselves” (ibid, page 194). In the Palazzo del Te, Romano employs rustication on the façade of the building, in keeping with the design of the time. However, upon closer examination of the façade, it becomes clear that not every stone is finished roughly, and some are left smooth and sleek. Further, one can see that some portions of the wall seemingly do not have any stones at all, smooth or rusticated. The reason for this is that the building is actually covered in a plaster. The building could not stand structurally with all the elements as they are shown in the façade, and further, the design of the building is monumental, and therefore would be too expensive to complete in stone. The façade being placed atop another building underneath it adds to the understanding of the building as fake and constructed for a viewer’s eye.
Outside view of the Tempietto (A History of Western Art/Laurie Adams, FADIS database)
The Tempietto in Rome, built in 1505 by Donato Bramante and commissioned by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain is an excellent example of Renaissance classicism at its peak. The building is perfectly circular, and is surrounded by a uniformly spaced colonnade. Above the colonnade, the entablature features alternating triglyphs and metopes. The building’s site was understood to be the place of St. Peter’s crucifixion, and the metopes depicted symbols related to the Saint, such as the keys to heaven that were given to him by Christ. The visual details here would be easy for one well-versed in Renaissance architectural elements to read. I would argue that the building’s simplicity and perfection in design helps emphasize its purpose as a devotional building where one could come for private prayer and strive for individual perfection.
After some examination, the building’s façade seemingly has no symmetry. The pilasters are spaced erratically, not following Renaissance ideals of number and proportion stemming from classic humanism. To explain this, there is an argument that Romano spaced the pilasters in uneven ways to create the illusion of symmetry from afar. As a result of the way the rooms were constructed within the Palazzo, Romano was faced with the challenge of organizing the windows and bays of the building in a way that would at least look organized, even if they were not (Forster and Tuttle, 1971, page 273). In my opinion, this argument might not hold water, as it could lead to the idea that Romano did not calculate the building’s proportions correctly. I would argue that it is more likely that Romano placed the pilasters at slightly uneven intervals so that from afar they would look symmetrical, but upon closer inspection, one would see they were not. This argument would add to the understanding that all of the building’s elements were meant to be playful and be a visual pun to an educated architectural eye.
Detail of dropped trigylph (Allison Syme slide collection, FADIS database)
To further this argument, if one looks closely at the façade, they would see that on occasion, the triglyphs in the entablature over the pilasters are misplaced or are falling. In ancient architecture, triglyphs were the end parts of wooden beams that held the roof above the building and rested directly atop the columns of a building, placing the most weight on the strongest portion of the support structure. In Renaissance architecture, many architects used the triglyphs ornamentally to keep with the authenticity of classical architecture. Here, however, Romano deliberately misplaces the triglyphs as they would not normally go with the Tuscan order. He lets some of them "fall" in order to call attention to the fact these are decorative, and do not, in fact, need to hold the building up. By doing this, Romano makes it clear to the viewer that they are looking at a clever illusion, and passes on yet another joke.
The building’s façade is covered in many of these clever references to the illusionary. In several of the arches, the main central stone, or the keystone, is falling out of the arch. The role of the keystone was to hold all the stones in an arch in an architectural feat, but in Romano’s Palazzo del Te, it is placed lower, as if gravity is pulling it out of the arch and the building is breaking. Similarly, between the triglyphs in the entablature, there are metopes depicting symbols important to the Gonzaga family, such as their family crest and military imagery (Hartt, 1950, page 159). However, there are several empty metopes – creating blank spaces and an inconsistent design. In "Gonzaga Symbols in the Palazzo del Te", the argument is made that the lofty imagery in the metopes and façade and the building’s relatively small scale “is one of the chief sources of its charm” (ibid). I posit that the building’s bashfulness in playing with what it shows and where it does or does not place it adds to its character as a pleasure palace for Mantua’s elites. It was meant to be a place where one would retreat from city life for amusement and relaxation with like-minded friends.
Detail of dropped keystone (Allison Syme slide collection, FADIS database)
The building’s amusing elements seem in stark contrast to the perfection and symmetry that Renaissance architects aimed for. The clever jokes in the façade’s design play with the viewers’ knowledge of architectural design and allow for them to have an educated laugh. The official term to characterize the design movement of the Palazzo del Te is Mannerism, an off-shoot of Renaissance design that took Renaissance and classicist ideals and stretched them. Mannerist art and architecture magnified certain elements of Renaissance design and gave them a new meaning, one that was self-aware of its own elements. In the case of the Palazzo del Te, the building’s purpose as a pleasure palace already complicated the prim and proper ideals of the Mantuan elite, and therefore Romano took a playful approach to refer to the use of the building itself.
During the Renaissance, architecture took on new roles. The architect was given more agency and worked to develop a building with their audience in mind. In the case of the Palazzo del Te, the audience was an educated metropolitan elite, looking to have a relaxing retreat. For Romano, the idea was that if the viewer was familiar with classicism and Renaissance architecture, they would understand the jokes built into the façade of the Palazzo, and would enter the space playful and relaxed.
Comments