milanese xv

8/13/2019 Milanese XV

1/12

Sculpture in Steel: A Milanese Renaissance Barbute

Author(s): Stephen V. GrancsaySource: The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, New Series, Vol. 21, No. 5 (Jan., 1963), pp.182-191Published by: The Metropolitan Museum of ArtStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3257953.

Accessed: 03/01/2014 05:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Metropolitan Museum of Artis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The

Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mmahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3257953?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3257953?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mma


2/12

culpture i n S t e e lA MILANESE RENAISSANCE BARBUTE

by STEPHEN V. GRANCSAY CuratorofArmsandArmorIn 1928 George A. Douglass was negotiating ea-gerly for an important addition to his collectionof medieval and Renaissance arms and armor.Both Mr. and Mrs. Douglass had been frequentvisitorsto the Museum for many years, and hereMr. Douglass came to know BashfordDean, thefirst Curatorof Arms and Armor, with the inevi-table result that he developed a strong interestin the subject.

Douglass was now in pursuit of an unusuallyattractive Milanese helmet, of a type called a

barbute (Figure i). It was one of the gems in thecollection of Baron CharlesAlexanderde Cosson,who, like Dean, was a leading scholar in thefield. De Cosson had formed several collectionsover a long period as an antiquary, and at thistime he was engaged in making arrangementsfor his third sale at Christie'sin London. He wastherefore reluctant to let the helmet go. "Youwill easily understand," he wrote to Douglass,"that I cannot sell one of my most importantpieces separately before the sale without preju-

I. Barbute,with marksof the armorerJacobo da CanobbiodettoBichignola and of Venice.Italian (Milan), aboutI470. Height II 3 inches. Weight5 pounds 4 ounces. Thicknessof bowl .045-. 25 inch. Gift of Mrs. GeorgeA. Douglass in memoryof her husband, 60.I51

This content downloaded from 147.91.246.195 on Fri, 3 Jan 2014 05:14:21 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/12

T h e etropolitanuseum o A r tJANUARY 1963

U L L T N

-? :tr:1 r pl I rlII- r t;?I- :?;jZt_-47a? ?-i;ai,F* -r-r?;P d

r i??'' i?rlPiaz



4/12

dice to its success." Nevertheless, like the truecollector he was, Douglass persistedin his nego-tiations for the helmet, and finally de Cossongave in. "I am very glad that you should possessmy fine barbute,"he wrote, accepting Douglass'soffer, "for you evidently thoroughly appreciateits beauty."De Cossonhad acquired the helmet from Pro-fessorLuigi Grassiof Florence, who in turn hadbought it with seven other barbutes from CountGino di Cittadella, who had a collection in theVilla Saonara,near Padua. De Cosson,who livedin Florence and was likely to know of any finepieces in his bailiwick, had firstchoice of the bar-butes. The late Sir Guy Laking, former Keeperof the Wallace Collection and Keeper of theKing's Armoury, in his Record f European rmourandArmsThroughevenCenturiesalled de Cosson'sselection "perhaps as grand a specimen as anyknown." Laking, incidentally, had a keen appre-ciation for this type of headpiece, for he had notonly a remarkable series of barbutes in his pro-fessional charge, but also possessedseveral out-standing examples in his own private collection.

One of these came to this Museum by way of thefamous Clarence H. Mackay collection.The helmet Douglasswanted so badly has nowbeen presentedto the Museum by Mrs. Douglass,in memory of her husband. It is a masterpieceofRenaissancemetalwork,a fine example of formalbeauty resulting from functional efficiency. Foralthough it was designed with an eye both tobeauty and utility, the principal aim of the ar-morerwas to protect the wearerfrominjury.Thecontour follows the lines of the head, protectingthe cranium and the sides of the face and neck,and curves outward at the nape for defenseagainst blows from behind. Following the T-shaped face opening is an applied rectangularborder to prevent a weapon from glancing offthe headpiece into the wearer's face. Around thecenter of the bowl is a row of rivets that held thestrapto which the lining was sewn, which in turnsuspendedthe bowl above the head and kept theedge from being smashed into the shoulders andcollarbones. Below these on each side are tworivets by which chin straps were fastened tohold the helmet on securelv. The lower border



5/12

is rolled outward over a wire, making the edgeboth smoother and stronger.But in satisfyingthesefunctional requirements,the helmet became a work of great beauty. Likeall the Museum'sbarbutes,it is of excellent work-manship, for the armorerswho made such pieceshad to spend years as apprentices at their com-plex and demanding craft before they becamemasters and were allowed to fashion armor bythemselves. But this barbute is superiorin its de-

2. Detail of the intarsia in theprivatestudyof Federigoda Montefeltro,dukeof Urbino, showing a barbutesurmountedby a crowned eagle, the crest of theMontefeltro amily. Rogers Fund, 39.r53

sign as well. Like most early armor, it is designedsimply, and its simplicity is what makes it sobeautiful. Its shape is singularlygracefuland ele-gant, showing the intrinsic beauty of the plainsurfaceof skillfullymodeled metal. It is aestheti-cally as important as a noteworthy piece of sculp-ture, for the armorer who made it was actuallya sculptor, working with that most intractablematerial-steel.The pure silhouette of the piece, however, isonly a part of the original decorative scheme.Italian armorers of the fifteenth century hadlearned to combine simplicity of line with pro-tective features that could hardly be improvedupon; hence the energies of artistswere increas-ingly expended upon ornamentation and enrich-ment. This helmet was not only a protectionagainst the weaponsof an enemy, but at the sametime an attractive element of dress, ornamentedby all the means known to art. It belongs to anage of steel and velvet, when it was customary touse velvet not only in costume, but also as a cov-ering for the elementsof armor and the trappingsof horses. While the applied border around theface opening of this helmet served principally todeflect blows, it also originally secured a fabriccovering-probably velvet, but possibly evensilk. A feature of this headpiece, furthermore,aswell as of a number of other barbutes in theMuseum'scollection, is a keyhole-shaped perfor-ation at the summit for attaching a tall, decora-tive crest. Unfortunately, both fabric and cresthave long since disappeared, as is almost alwaysthe case with helmets of this type.A barbutewith its rich velvet or silk covering,gilded bronze borders,and personalcrest formedan ensemble of great elegance. Excellent exam-ples may be seen in contemporary representa-tions, such as Pisanello's sketch dated I448 forthe medal of Alfonso of Aragon in the Louvre(Figure3) and in the Museum's intarsia-paneledstudy (about 1479-1482) of Federigo da Monte-feltro, duke of Urbino (Figure 2). Among theweapons and armor shown in Duke Federigo'strompe'oeil closet is a barbute surmounted by thecrowned Montefeltro eagle. The Duke, who wasthe greatestcondottiere of his day, no doubt hadan actual helmet of this type in his armory.In spite of their richness, such helmets werestill essentially functional. Parade pieces made



6/12

D'IvV/'VS', LPHOIq SVS'

Tk.IVM PHAT \'K ET-PACI fICV'/

3. Drawing by Antonio Pisanellofor a medal of Al-fonso of Aragon, with a barbutecrownedby a bat.Musee du Louvre

simply for display, of which almost no examplesany longer exist, were often embellished withjewels and precious metals. Such exaggeratedornament may be seen on a unique Italian hel-met in the Museum (Figure 4), the bowl of whichis completely covered by a lion's mask of gildedcopper with enamel eyes. Other pieces are knownonly from documents. It is recorded, for example,that the Florentines presented Duke Federigo,on his triumphal entry into the city afterhis suc-cessful campaign of I472, with "a silver helmetstudded with jewels and chased in gold by themasterly hand of Pollaiuolo." And the Venetianhistorian Marino Sanuto (1466- 533) quotes theFlorentine sculptor nad rchitect Andrea Sanso-vino (1460-1529), concerning a helmet made bytwo goldsmiths, Vincenzo Levriero and LuigiCaorlini, and sold to the Sultan of Turkey. Thecrest was of gold, enriched with pearls, emeralds,rubies, and four diamonds that alone were worthten thousand ducats.An explanation of the unusual nomenclatureof this headpiece is probablynecessary.The termbarbute ame into use in Italy in the fourteenthcentury, but the form as we now know it was

developed in the fifteenth, when it was widelyworn duringthe constant civil wars of the period.One counted men-at-arms in Italy by barbutes,as in France they were counted by lances, theterm referringnot to an individual but to a fight-ing unit. For example, in some documents a bar-buta was defined as duecorazzecondue cavalli-"two cuirasseswith two horses,"or two mountedmen and two on foot, and there were doubtlessother variations in the number comprising theunit.

The barbute is an exclusively Italian formthat developed from the basinet, as may be seenin the drawingson the following pages. The basi-net derived in turn from the conical Normancasque, which in turn had its prototype in bar-barian and Near Eastern examples. The designof medieval armorevolved out of combat experi-ence; as the wearer suffered injuries in unpro-tected areas, additions and modifications weremade in his armor, with weight as the mainlimiting condition. In the development of thebasinet from the simple casque, the bowl wasmade taller to presenta glancing surfaceto blowsand to give more space above the cranium, andthe back and sides were extended to protect moreof the face and neck. A hood of mail, called acamail, was added, to give furtherprotection tothe chin, neck, and shoulders; and a visor wasintroduced, firsthinged at the forehead and laterpivoted at the sides.4. Barbute-sallet overedwith an ornamental ion'smask of coppergilt. Italian, about1460. DickFund, 23.141

185



7/12

BARBUTES

Barbutewithnasal BarbutewithMilanese,about1450 hingednasalMilanese,about I450Barbute BarbuteMilanese, with Milanese, about r470Bichignola's mark,about 1470(Figures I, g)BASINETS

Basinet with attach-mentsfor camailItalian, 1410-r440

VisoredbasinetItalian, 1400

BasinetItalian, about 1350

NORMAN CASQUE

NormancasqueXII century

The prototype of the barbute may be seen ina basinet from Chalcis, dating from 4I 0 to I440,portrayed in the drawings. It retains vervellesalong the edges for attaching a camail. Minusthe camail, and with a rounded bowl to conformwith the contour of the head, this helmet wouldqualify as a barbute. In fact, the transition frombasinet to barbute is largely a change in propor-tion. Some basinets were so tall that they restedon the shoulders and collarbone, hence it wasnecessary to shorten them, and the barbute wasthe result.The barbute may have gotten its name fromthe fact that it usually lacked protection for thelower part of the face and therefore exposed thebeard (barbuta).Another possible explanation isthat the camail often worn with the early typeresembled a beard.An excellent document show-ing a beardlike camail is the equestrian statueof Can Grande della Scala (died 1329) in Verona(Figure 5). The celata literally "concealed") hasa similar descriptive derivation, for the barbutabecame the celata when it protected and con-cealed the entire face by attaching a beaver.Both terms are often used to describe the Italianheadpiece.Precise nomenclature is in fact nearly impos-sible in this area. The barbuteis by some scholarscalled the barbute-sallet, because like the sallet,which is also a fifteenth century type, it does notenclose the whole head and offers most protec-



8/12

BARBUTE-SALLETS

Barbute-sallet Barbute-salletMilanese, about 1475 coveredby a copper-gilt lion's mask

Italian, about 1460(Figure 4)

tion to the top. Unlike the barbute, however, thesallet is often characterized by a reinforced fore-head-plate and an elongated, pivoted nape de-fense. It is nonetheless often difficult to differen-tiate between the barbute, the sallet, and thebasinet, because the various types tend to blendinto one another. The shallow barbute resemblesthe sallet, while the deep form resembles thebasinet.

The form of the barbute was in one other im-portant sense not a new one. The close-fittingbarbute, with its narrow opening for the eyes andnose, very much resembles the Corinthian helmetof the Greeks (Figure 8). The barbute, of course,had an independent origin, and this is simply acase of recurrence of type-forged in steel in-stead of bronze. It belongs to a period, however,when a very strong leaning toward the antiqueprevailed, and this classical bias may well haveinspired the perfection of form of the headpiece.Roman versions of Greek reliefs and other sculp-ture were well known in the period, and helmetsof this type frequently appear in portrayals ofmythological subjects. It may be that the classi-cal influence was direct as well as spiritual. Inany event the Greek ideal of purity and simpli-city of form was admirably re-created by theRenaissance armorer.

It was particularly in Venice that such a type ofheadpiece was worn. This barbute like manyothers bears the stamp of the Venetian Republic,

SalletGerman, bout1475

the lion of St. Mark, impressed near the lower-right front border. The mark, illus- - .. ::trated at the right, is barely legible, .%*and the accompanying drawing showsits intended appearance. Since thou- 'isands of such barbutes were originally ': lworn in Venice, it is thought by some a Cexperts that the stamp was a mark of ownership

5. Detail of theequestriantatueof Can Grande ellaScalaat Verona,howinga basinetwith camailzui.iiii: ': f3W:K

SALLET



9/12

by the Venetian Republic-perhaps the Arsenalof Venice itself-in the same way that the broad-arrowstampindicatesBritishgovernmentowner-ship. On the otherhand, the Venetian stampmavbe simply a control mark, indicating that head-pieces bearing it were sold in Venice or exportedby way of Venice. There is a record of paymentin the Archives of Tours, France, indicating thatit was customary to stamp armor in this way:A Jehan Harane,orfevre, ouravoirgraveles armesde la ville en2 poinsons eferpourmarqueresharnoiset brigandinesenduesn lad. ville30 s. ("To JehanHarane, goldsmith, for having carved the armsof the city on two iron punches in order to markthe harnesses and brigandines sold in that citythirty sous").At any rate the marks of Venice that I haveexamined are shallow and often imperfect, anindication that the impressionwas made on thecold metal-or after the helmet was completed.There is even better

evidence, however,that this helmet wasnot made in Venice.There are three ar-morer's marksstampedat the back of the bowlon the right side. Theimpressions are deepand hence must havebeen stamped into themetal while it washeated. Two of the

marks, the letters IdB surmounted by a doublecross with split foot (shown above), appear sideby side, and above them is the mark of a goat'sor ram's head.Trademarks were in general use at this time;each merchant or craftsman had his own. It isknown that great importance was attached tomarks by armorers, and documents show thatlawsuitswere filedclaiming improperuseof them.Having forged the metal deftly into creationsthat were characteristicof his individual skill, thearmorer stamped deeply into the finished workhis mark, a guarantee of quality. Each armorer'swork was unique, and it was understood thatsince a distinguished armorer's work could notbe duplicated by anybody else, his mark shouldnot be copied either. Hence the identification of

a mark is of considerable importance, for al-though the lack of identifiable marks on manyof the best examples of early armor is notorious,when they do exist they are virtually the signa-ture of the artist.There are recorded only two other elementsof armor, both barbutes, that bear the samemarks. One, in the Kunstgewerbe Museum inCologne (Figure 6), also came from the collec-tion of Count Cittadella. Another is in the TowerArmouries in London (Figure 7). All three hel-mets display marked similarities in design, andthe same fine technique. They are evidently thework of a master.The previous owner of our helmet, de Cosson,ingeniously deciphered these marks,and so iden-tified not only the maker but the source of thesepieces. While studying the problem of identifica-tion, he learned that one of the biggest armedships on Lake Como in 1449 belonged to Milanand was called La Bichignola.He also learnedthat bichignolan old Milanese dialect meant"rammish, goatish, smelling of a goat," and itoccuried to him that this might be the wordsymbolized by the ram's or goat's head used asthe armorer'smark. It was of course fairly com-mon among artists in all fields to use as a marka device that was a play on the artist'sname, andthere did in fact exist an armorer whose nick-name was Bichignola, although for several cen-6. Barbute,with Bichignola's mark.Italian (Milan),about i470. KunstgewerbeMuseum, Cologne

^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i?c

as'W

188



10/12

turies he had been merely a name in contem-porary documents. In I470 Louis XI of Franceasked Duke Galeazzo Maria of Milan to sendto France the armorer Jacobino Ayroldo, withtwelve other experienced armorers and theirtools, to make armor for the king and the lordsand knights of his court. (The stamp IA on a bea-ver in this Museum may be that of Jacobino Ay-roldo.) Bichignola was apparently one of thesearmorers, for a letter from the Duke of Milan toLouis, dated March 20, I472, asks for the releaseof Jacobo, called Bichignola of Milan, armorerand skillful master, imprisoned and charged withsmuggling arms in the dominion of the king forthe use of the king's enemies. Like other dealersin arms, before and since, Bichignola seems tohave felt no scruples about providing arms simul-taneously to both sides. Bichignola's real name,Jacobo da Canobbio, appears in another docu-ment, but he appears to have used his colorfulnickname in his marks, for the initials IdB appar-ently stand for Jacobo detto ("called") Bichig-nola.

It is not surprising that these helmets are asso-ciated with Milan. They show the inimitableMilanese touch. Milan for several centuries wasthe great center where all that was newest andmost beautiful in armor first appeared, and thegradual development and improvement of platearmor was accomplished during the fourteenthand fifteenth centuries in Milanese workshops.Moreover, the Milanese controlled the Alpinepasses on which trade between Italy and westernEurope largely depended. When he was in Avig-non (1350-1383), Francesco di Marco Datini, thefamous merchant of Prato, at first dealt chieflyin armor, mainly imported from two Milanesefirms, Basciamuolo of Pescina and Danesruolloof Como. The pieces, principally helmets andcuirasses, were carefully wrapped in straw andpacked in canvas bales, which were then carriedon muleback across the Alps-the journey byPavia and Avigliana taking about three weeks.From Milan Europe was supplied not onlywith its best armor but with armorers. Milanesearmorers were renowned outside Italy, and therewas great rivalry between princes to secure theirservices abroad. Charles V (I364-I380) andCharles VI ( 380- I422) introduced Milanese ar-mor to Paris, and there was an important colony

7. Barbute,with Bichignola's mark. Italian (Milan),about i470. The Armouries, H. M. Tower ofLondon. Photograph:British Crown Copyrightof Lombard armorers in Lyons that continuedto prosper well into the sixteenth century. AndFroissart informs us in his Chronicles that whenthe Earl of Derby, afterward King Henry IV ofEngland, had to carry out an affair of honor withthe Duke of Norfolk in 1398, he applied to DukeGaleazzo Visconti for a suit of armor. Galeazzonot only allowed him free choice amongst hisown, but also sent four of his best armorers toset the armor room of the Earl in order.

This helmet represents the superb techniqueof the Milanese armorer at its finest. In armor,aesthetic perfection derives from technical per-fection, and the manner in which this piece wasfashioned is one of its most fascinating features.It is essentially constructed of iron, but the outersurface is of well-tempered, hardened steel, in-geniously welded to the iron core.The making of steel from iron was largely amystery until the eighteenth century. There weresome artisans who knew how to accomplish it,but they kept their methods a secret and appar-ently had little or no understanding of the chem-istry involved. In the Middle Ages and Renais-sance, little was known about the nature of steel

189



11/12

except that it was an ironlike material that, un-like iron, could be hardened by quenching theheated metal in cold water. It was generally be-lieved that the production of steel depended uponthe type of iron ore used, and there was no ink-ling that the difference between iron and steellay in the amount of carbon retained in the metalduring the smelting and forging processes.When the ore was smelted, in a small furnacebetween layers of charcoal, the metal producedwas very irregular, since the temperature was nothigh enough to melt it completely and make ithomogeneous. It emerged from the furnace inthe form of a paste: partly iron, with the carbonabsorbed from the charcoal burnt out of it, andpartly iron approaching steel, with traces of car-bon fused into it. The smith apparently separatedthese parts according to the way they looked,and welded pieces of similar composition intolumps: some iron, some steel or steely iron.

The armorer received these lumps from thesmith hammered into bars or plates. He re-heated them to welding temperature, and ham-mered them together into bars with one surfaceof iron and the other of steel. Pieces would becut from these bars as needed and pounded outinto plates for shaping into armor elements. The

8. Bronze Corinthianhelmet. Greek,late vII-earlyVI centuryB.C. RogersFund, 19.192.35

initial work of shaping was done hot, but by farthe greater part of the processwas accomplishedupon the cold metal. The initial heavy hammer-ing was done from the inside-i.e. the iron side;the later work from the exterior, or steel side.The armorer used hammers of various forms, tospread the metal or to draw it together. To keepweight to a minimum the piece was forged tovaryingthicknesses,and washeaviest at the pointswhere greatest protection was needed.Since the hammering caused the steel to be-come superhardenedand thereforebrittle, it wasnecessaryto soften it from time to time by anneal-ing, or heating. When the forging was finished,the heated steel was quenched in water to pro-duce an extremely hard outer surface, capableof taking a glasslike polish and proofeven againstcrossbow bolts. In Chastellain's chronicle of theFlemish champion Jacques de Lalain, one ofLalain's jousting opponents, Messire Jean deBonniface, in the service of the Duke of Milan,is described as wearing a harnesstrempe'. . d'uneeauequile tenoit i bonquefernepouvaitprendreus("quenched in water that so hardened it that itcould not be penetrated"). It is thus easy to un-derstand why the monarchs of Europe endeav-ored to transplantthe armorers of Milan to theirsoil: the knight in Milanese armor was virtuallyinvulnerable.

Fine elements of armor, such as the barbutethat Mrs. Douglass has presented to the Muse-um, still serve as an inspiration to metalworkerstoday. Engineers may find especial fascinationin the work of the ancient armorer,for even nowit is a major problem to make efficient dies forpressing steels and alloys into specified shapes.But it is perhaps the modern diemaker, whometiculously follows the mathematical specifica-tions on a blueprint,who can best appreciate thefine contours of an element of armor that resultsfrom the unaided coordination of hand and eye,with only an occasional check made with a stiffpaper pattern.It is necessary to go to Milan if one wishes tosee the cathedral and the castle, two great monu-ments of the art and history of the Milanese. Butit is not obligatory to go to Milan to study an-other of its great arts-that of the armorer.Some of the most remarkable Milanese armorextant is exhibited in this Museum.



12/12

9. The Museum'sbarbutebyBichignola

191

milanese xv

Documents