The Gardens of the Villa di Castello:

The Villa di Castello, located at the foot of the hills northwest of Florence, was the country residence of Cosimo I de’Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany (1519 – 1574). The gardens, filled with fountains, statuary, and a grotto, became famous throughout Europe. The villa also housed some of the great art treasures of Florence, including Sandro Botticelli’s Renaissance masterpieces The Birth of Venus and Primavera. The gardens of the villa exerted a profound influence on the design of the Italian Renaissance garden and, later, the French formal garden. Once Cosimo secured his power, he began to develop the buildings and gardens of the villa. As the architect and author Giorgio Vasari wrote: ‘At this place the Duke began to build a little, one thing after another, to the end that he might reside there more commodiously, himself and his court’. The villa was located near a Roman aqueduct and took its name from the water cisterns (castella) near the site. Cosimo commissioned the engineer Piero da San Casciano to construct a system of aqueducts to bring water to the villa and its gardens, the sculptor Niccolò Tribolo to create fountains, statues and a garden, and the architect Vasari himself to restore and enlarge the villa. The garden was designed to deliver a clear political message; that, after a long period of warfare and suffering, Cosimo intended to lead Florence into a new Golden Age, characterised by peace, prosperity, and harmony.

The garden is laid out on descending levels, with a substantial drop from the level of the Appennino statue and the ‘wild area’, with the trapezoidal nursery beds, to the lower level of the grotto, which bears witness to the immense excavation and terracing work performed on the original land mass, truly impressive for 16th-Century technology. It is in this drop that the Grotto of the Animals is found, as is laid out in Gustav Utens’ famous lunette of the gardens, showing the entrance to the grotto and the two side niches in the headwall, all clad in tufa.

The Grotto of the Animals:

One of the most famous features of the garden was the Grotto of the Animals (also known as the Grotto of the Flood), a cave entered through a doorway in the upper wall of the garden. The walls of the cave were covered with limestone moulded to resemble a natural cavern, embedded with stones, mosaic and shells. In three chambers around the grotto were groups of birds and animals, made of multicoloured bronze and marble. In each chamber there was also a large, sculpted marble basin. When the grotto was operating, water streamed from the ceiling and walls into the marble basins. The grotto originally had a statue of Orpheus with a lyre standing in the centre, as though the animals were listening to his music. The grotto was designed so that, if a key were turned, the gate would lock guests inside, and they would be soaked with water from hidden pipes.

In his Life of Antonio Lorenzi, Vasari recounts that the artist ‘is still creating new works for the Duke, with mixed animals and birds for fountains’ (VII, p. 636). These animals, which can be seen today, were perhaps carved by brothers Antonio and Stoldo Lorenzi in multicoloured marble, but other artists such as Cosimo Fancelli have been suggested, and Ammannati has been proposed as the author of one horse. It is, however, the bronze birds that remain the most remarkable legacy of the grotto.

The Bronze Birds:

Bartolomeo Ammannati was seemingly first contracted to create bronze birds for the grotto, and between 8 October 1558 and 22 July 1559, he worked on ‘bronze animals ... for the Castello’ (Zangheri, 1971, p. 22) together with his workshop assistant Girolamo Noferi da Sassoferrato. In 1566 he resumed this work, as noted in a postscript to a letter dated 14 December, when Ammannati ordered a Pisan agent a large quantity of white clay, needed to build a furnace to cast birds and bronze statuettes commissioned by the Grand Duke (see The Giannalisa Feltrinelli Library, part II, Christie’s, London, 3 December 1997).

The finest of the bronze birds were made by Giambologna. His involvement is noted in a letter to Francis I, written in the summer of 1567, in which Giambologna recounts that he too was preparing to model birds (Gaye 1939-40, III, p. 246, doc. CCXXI, 4 May 1567), as Raffaello Borghini confirmed in 1584 (p. 588), in the passages dedicated to the Flemish sculptor: ‘Of many bronze portraits made from life, which are in the Grotta di Castello’.

The gardens and the grotto were costly to run, and were already deteriorating in the 17th Century, but it was during the Lorraine regency that they were allowed to fall into serious decay. On 1 October 1745 it was noted that ‘26 bronzes animals are attached to the vault of the said grotto’ ((ASF, Report of the state found [...] grottoes and water features for services [...); ASF, FL, 2776, ins. Report of where it is found and work to be done at the Factories and Fountains of His Imperial Majesty).

Of the twenty-six bronze animals noted in the grotto in 1745, seven birds were removed to a warehouse of the Royal Factories in Boboli, and eventually went to the Bargello Museum in 1865, whilst five remained in the caves until 1970, at which time they, too, were moved to the Bargello, and another bronze dove in the Bargello is also assumed to have originated from the grotto. Therefore, of the twenty-six, thirteen bronze animals are missing, a dramatic loss considering that among them were masterpieces of Florentine animalistic art.

The Location of the Missing Birds:

Of these thirteen missing birds, here we note the presence of three bronze birds at Castle Howard in Yorkshire, a Hawk and Owl surely by the hand of Giambologna, and a Duck more likely to be by an assistant, which, by their subject, scale, free handling and their intended positioning, can be confidently associated with the Grotto. Another bronze bird at the Bargello Museum, a small Eagle, whose provenance is unknown, has long been linked to the Grotto and was previously attributed to Giambologna. It was not discussed by Heikamp, presumably because it is not documented, but appears to the present author to be closer to Ammannati’s creations in its repose, although the influence of Giambologna in the handling is evident. There is also a Pigeon in the Louvre (RF 730), which is catalogued as a later cast, but cannot be dismissed.

We can add to this list another bronze bird, unpublished, a boldly modelled Woodpecker, at Woburn Abbey. What is interesting about the presence of these birds at Castle Howard and Woburn Abbey is that both collections were largely built up in the 18th Century when the Grotto was broken up. Both Henry Howard, 4th Earl of Carlisle (1694 – 1758) of Castle Howard, and John Russell, 4th Duke of Bedford (1710 – 1770) visited Italy in the 1730s on their respective Grand Tours and made numerous celebrated purchases, continuing to acquire artworks for their rest of their lives. These bronze eagles, which display so many of the characteristics of the above-mentioned birds, should also be added to this group of bronze animals, presumably from the dispersal of the Grotto in the 18th Century.

Giambologna and Ammannati:

In an essay on the birds of the Grotto in the exhibition catalogue Giambologna. Triumph des Körpers, (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, 27 June – 17 Sept. 2006, pp. 249-52), Prof. Detlef Heikamp attributed three birds to Ammannati (Eurasian Eagle Owl, Common Eagle Owl, Pheasant), four birds to Ammannati’s assistants (Falcon, Rooster, Domestic Dove, Peacock), and six birds to Giambologna (Golden Eagle, Kestrel, Turkey, Dove with wings just opened, Dove with open wings, Thrush).

Ammannati’s carefully observed birds were surely copied from living models, as ‘there is no other explanation for how he manages to precisely define the enormous pupils of the eagle owl’s eyes and admirably render the soft plumage that enables this nocturnal bird of prey to fly at night, in the dark, without making a sound’ (Heikamp, op. cit.). His bronze birds can be differentiated because Ammannati abandoned movement and instead rendered his birds in moments of repose, describing the plumage of each bird in fine relief without any great depth. His birds preserve the traces of the model and the marks of the wooden tools which he worked the moist, soft clay, and this gives his birds a marvellous freshness.

Heikamp separates this group from the second grouping of birds that he attributed to Ammanati’s assistants, in which the plumage is modelled feather by feather, resulting in a perfectionism bordering on the pedantic, lacking the master’s rapid, almost impressionistic touch. In his opinion, the stiffly-modelled Peacock is characteristic of this group, probably all modelled by the same hand, which Heikamp cautiously attributed to Ammannati’s named assistant on the commission, Girolamo di Noferi da Sassofermato, although Zikos noted that the relative smallness of his salary diminishes his role and rather contradicts his inventive independence (D. Zikos, in Budapest 2008, p. 292). Zikos, in the 2011 exhibition catalogue on Ammannati, instead attributes the Peacock and Rooster to Ammannati himself (P. Strozzi and D. Zikos, eds., Bartolomeo Ammannati Scultore, Florence, 2011, nos. 9-10, pp. 368-70.)

Giambologna elevated this commission to new heights, practically unmatched in European art. The artist, who was well-versed in the dynamics of the interconnected movements thanks to his familiarity with the depictions of horses and other large animals, was now able to extend his knowledge to birds, exploring their motor reflexes in real life with evident zeal and acumen. Unlike Ammannati, Giambologna aimed to depict the birds in motion, giving his sculptures equal beauty from multiple viewpoints. This is especially true for the Eagle, the Turkey, the Kestrel, and the Thrush.

Giambologna focused his efforts on interpreting each creature’s character and soul with exquisite sensitivity. The case of the eagle is paradigmatic, because he resists the temptation to apply to the animal both the obvious heraldic reminiscences and the pathos bestowed upon it in ancient Imperial Rome. His complete immunity to convention and tradition enables Giambologna to present the eagle in a completely new light: as Heikamp notes ‘his bird of prey is not at all “real”, alienating, or domineering, but rather seems a creature dominated by fear and mistrust, intent on examining its surroundings to immediately take flight in case of danger’.

These bronzes, created almost en passant one summer, as is known from his letter on the subject, were made in a hurry: Giambologna did not prepare the casting moulds with the patience necessary to ensure that the liquid metal reached all the extremities, as can be seen in the numerous holes and defects in his fabulous Turkey. But these disadvantages arguably benefit the work, wonderfully enhancing the spontaneity that was already the foundation of its creation, and contributing to the rendering of the character of this bizarre animal.

The Pair of Eagles in Flight:

In the impressionistic depiction of the plumage, each feather individually rendered, boldly overlapping and with very little finish, these birds are instantly comparable to Giambologna’s two Doves, Thrush and Kestrel. They are depicted precisely at the moment when the eagle is about to take off, a single phase of a transitory process that takes place in a fraction of a second, captured so accurately as to surely have been studied from life. Giambologna noticeably never chose to depict his birds while they are hovering in the air, preferring to present them at the moment of landing or when they are about to take flight, and this is apparent also in the present eagles, which are not yet flying but are about to take that first powerful flutter. The eagles are not soaring or gliding, their wings are not yet outstretched, and their talons are bunched in front of them.

These depictions are supremely confident and show an accurate understanding of the countenance and spirit of the eagle. They interpret the animal’s character without humanising them. The modelling is very different from that seen in the group of birds by Ammannati and his assistant. They are instead quickly modelled, in an attempt to give the idea of motion, rather than focusing on the perfect delineation of a feather. They are cast to be hung or held from above, evidence of their origin in the Castello Grotto.

The undersides of the plumages of both eagles are, like Giambologna’s Kestrel, formed of many thick, broad and deeply modelled feathers. Their faces are alert, like those of Giambologna’s birds, which were unique in 16th-Century sculpture; these are not birds in repose but in motion.

Where they perhaps differ slightly from Giambologna is in the attempt to describe the feathers in more detail through the use of individual toolmarks. While he does use this technique elsewhere, it is less prevalent, and it suggests that this pair of Eagles was made by a close assistant, one who interpreted Giambologna’s working methods and style, but who wished to give a greater degree of finish to his creations. Similar in finish to the smaller Eagle in the Bargello, they are however grander in scale and ambition and more dynamic. They were surely created at the same time as Giambologna’s birds in 1567, during a summer when Giambologna was trying to fit them into a period between commissions and was surely keen to balance this important and probably enjoyable challenge with the completion of more lucrative work.