Torquato Tasso produced the Christian epic, Gerusalemme Liberata in 1581. This work rivaled Ludovico Ariosto’s epic, Orlando Furioso by combining the influence of classical myth with Christian morality.  Not only was it a major contribution to Italian Renaissance literature, it immediately became a popular subject depicted in art and maintained its recognition for centuries to come. Painters such as Annibale Caracci and Anthony Van Dyck used different romantic subplots within the epic as a main focus in their works.

While these artists were illustrating the same storylines they were often influenced in different ways. In particular, Gaimbattista Tiepolo painted many works about the love story between Rinaldo and Armida. However it is his series of paintings held in the Chicago Art Institute that illustrates how Tiepolo was geographically influenced by his work and how his interpretation of the lovers could be attributed to what Venice was experiencing at the time.  

This series of paintings depicts four scenes that describe the love affair between Rinaldo and Armida. Chronologically Tiepolo depicts Armida as a declining force within each painting. In the first painting she is positioned above Rinaldo and appears to be a god-like, dominant figure, this decline of power continues until she has completely disappeared from the scene in Tiepolo’s last painting. While she becomes weaker Rinaldo becomes stronger. Considering the Venice Tiepolo lived in, the artist could easily have been influenced by this age of decline and used it to demonstrate the state of Venice through Armida. 

In order to form a clear understanding of this topic I will explain a number of elements that have led me to this thesis. First and foremost it is important to understand the context of these paintings. To do this I will go into detail about the life of Torquato Tasso, what influenced him to write Gerusalemme Liberata, how it was received and how it culturally influenced the Renaissance. Next I will analyze the content of Gerusalemme Liberata, explaining for whom it was written, why it was written, and what the main themes of the text are. Most importantly, I will explain the importance of the romantic subplots, in particular, the love story between Rinaldo and Armida. After I have done this I will analyze, how it developed into a common theme used in art, and what idea patrons were trying to convey about themselves in commissioning paintings of scenes out of Gerusalemme Liberata.

After this I will write about the life of Tiepolo and his relationship to Venice. In doing this I will also explain the state of Venice during Tiepolo’s life and how this affected him as an artist. This topic will then lead into a discussion about the number of paintings Tiepolo worked on that involved the theme of Rinaldo and Armida.  I will then focus intently on the four series painted in Venice and how each one relates to the text. In doing this I would like to compare Tiepolo’s interpretation of these specific paintings to other painters such as Simon Vouet and Anthony Van Dyck. This will lead to my conclusion where I will form a connection between Tiepolo’s depictions of Armida in his series of four paintings, to the state of Venice during the artists’ time.

 Torquato Tasso was born near Naples in 1544 and died in Rome in 1595. Throughout his lifetime he wrote constantly about the first crusades and ultimately attempted to rival Ludovico Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso by composing his own Christian Epic focusing on the Crusades, Gerusalemme Liberata. Although Tasso was never satisfied with this work the epic immediately “Took cultivated Europe by storm” (Rensselaer W Lee, Poetry into Painting: Tasso and Art) He studied at the University of Padua, a city very close to Venice, and was originally encouraged by his friends, Verdizzotti, a pupil of Titian, and Cataneo, a sculptor to compose the epic while in Venice in 1560. As he continued for the rest of his life to perfect his epic he also wrote a number of other works under the patronage of the Duke Alfonso d’Este.

There are three distinct goals Tasso had in mind in creating Gerusalemme Liberata. First, he attempted to imitate the classics, themes from the Illiad and the Aeneid are evident in his epic. Secondly, he tried to emphasize historical facts and true religion. For this reason he focused on the first crusades and the Christians conquering Jerusalem.  And lastly, he wanted to rival the Orlando Furioso, an epic created under the same Este patronage by Ludovico Ariosto in 1516.

There are a few amorous subplots described in the Gerusalemme Liberata however the one most depicted in art, and that Tiepolo focuses on in his paintings, is the love story between Rinaldo and Armida. Rinaldo is a character influenced by Achilles in the Iliad. He is one of the most important soldiers fighting in the crusade. Armida is a pagan sorceress who has been sent by her uncle to lead the important soldiers, like Rinaldo, away from the Crusades. Just as Armida is about to kill the sleeping Rinaldo she falls in love with him and holds him hostage in her enchanted garden in Syria where he falls in love with her. Eventually he is discovered by his fellow soldiers, Ubaldo and Carlo, and forced to leave Armida. While this is only a subplot it fits well into the rest of the story and a general message Tasso was trying to convey, that being, personal sacrifice for a greater good.  Literary scholar Ralph Nash states, “Tasso is concerned chiefly with expounding two significant details: the strong city Jerusalem stands as a symbol of man’s pursuit of earthly felicity; and Godfrey and Rinaldo stand respectively for the rational and the ‘wrathful’ faculties of the soul. Thus the historical Crusade becomes an Everyman story of the individual’s attempt to reconcile disparate and warring elements in his nature in the pursuit of earthly happiness.” (Nash, Ralph, Jerusalem Delivered, Introduction) Later, art patrons will use scenes from Gerusalemme Liberata to directly relate themselves to this theme.

Bernardo Castello a Mannerist artist from Genoa, produced the first illustrated edition of Gerusalemme Liberata in 1590. He concentrated on the historical parts of the epic, rather than the romantic subplots in order to capture the main action of the story.

During the seventeenth century artists started to pay more attention to the romantic subplots of the epic, scholar John Hamilton states, “With a direct instinct for genuine poetry, they cut through its arid rhetorical shell to those passages where Tasso laid aside his mannered style and wrote with superb ease and naturalness, passages amorous and idyllic and dramatic, that take their place among the finest in all Italian literature…” (Hamilton, John, Poetry into Paintings: Tasso and Art) Judging by this quote it is possible that the reason Tasso’s amorous subplots were the most popular of the scenes depicted within the Gerusalemme Liberata is because it is the part in his epic that he the most natural and poetic.

It is believed that near the end of the 16^th century Annibale Carracci, an artist from Bologna, was the first artist to illustrate the poems famous love episodes. His painting, Rinaldo and Armida, now in the Capodimonte Museum in Naples, depicts Rinaldo reclining in Armida’s lap while the sorceress looks into her mirror. Rinaldo appears to be in a certain trance, while Armida, looking superior, has a very concentrated look on her face. Shortly after, Van Dyck, highly influenced by Titian, painted a scene depicting Armida’s first encounter with Rinaldo. It is now in the Baltimore Museum of Fine Arts.  During the same time, in 1630, Simon Vouet painted the most complete series devoted to the story of Armida. It is entirely dependent on Tasso’s text.  The illustrated texts, as well as the paintings mentioned above, mark an artistic period in which the story of Armida and Rinaldo was developing into a major theme that would later be depicted frequently in art for various reasons.

Large pictorial settings focusing on the stories of the Gerusalemme Liberata began to be produced within private palaces during the 1700s. Their main purpose was to honor the patrons. Art scholar Keith Christianson states, “Such sets usually responded to the desires of patrons to glorify their status, ambitions, and accomplishments, and the works often depicted heroic subject matter exalting extraordinary deeds, exceptional virtues, and high-minded self-denial.” (Christianson Keith, Giambattista Tiepolo)  It is this major trend that allowed Tiepolo to paint so many scenes from Gerusalemme Liberata,

Giambattista Tiepolo was born in 1696 in the Corte San Domenico Castello in Venice. Although he was not from a wealthy family and had nine brothers and sisters, in 1710 Tiepolo was able to enter into the workshop of one of the most successful painters in Venice at the time, Gregorio Lazzarini, he is considered Tiepolo’s only teacher. While there Tiepolo copied paintings by Tintoretto, Bassano, Slaviati, and Titian, for practice. Lazzarini had many relations with people abroad which allowed Tiepolo to obtain commissions outside of Venice in places such as Ferrrara, Milan, Genoa, and many more. Throughout his career as a painter Tiepolo was constantly traveling in and out of Venice to undertake various commissions.  

It is important to note, that the Venice of Tiepolo’s lifetime was in a state of decline that would eventually lose its independence to Napoleon in 1797.  In describing Venice at this time Count Paul Daru stated, “ She is reduced to a passive existence. She has no more wars to sustain, peaces to conclude, or desires to express. A mere spectator of events, in her determination to take no part in events, she pretends to take no interest in them.” (Count Paul Daru, A History of Venice) Perhaps this interpretation of the city is a bit too harsh, however it supports the fact that the city was in a state of decline during Tiepolo’s time. Given that, the commercial prosperity of the city was still thriving. Due to the fact that Venice was no longer a military force to be feared there was an influx of tourists, this was the age of the Great Tour and Carnival. Along with this Venice’s allowed its economy to flourish through the opera and art. This allowed painters such as Tiepolo to thrive in Venice, taking up various commissions for the wealthy in public buildings as well as private palaces.

From 1742-1745 Giambattista was commissioned by the Cornaro family to work on a series of four paintings that depicted the story of Rinaldo and Armida. These paintings are thought to have occupied the Cornaro family’s palace in the room of mirrors. Around this time Tiepolo entered into one of the busiest phases of his career. Between 1751-1753 Tiepolo painted two scenes in Wurzburg Germany depicting Rinaldo and Armida in her garden, and Rinaldo abandoning Armida. Between 1750-1755 Tiepolo also worked on a series of paintings in London that depicted scenes from Gerusalemme Liberata. In 1755 he was also commissioned to paint a number frescos in the Villa Valmarana in Vicenza, each room focused on different epics. They were the Stanza del’Iliad, The Stanza dell’Eneide, The Stanza dell’Orlando Furioso, and the Stanza della Gerusalemme Liberata. These paintings, in particular the frescos of the Villa Valmarana, and the series in Venice exemplify the art market of the time. They were commissioned for private wealthy families in order to display their glory and honor in society.

Returning to the four series painted for the Cornaro family in Venice, from my research to date this is the only depiction I have found of the story of Rinaldo and Armida that was commissioned in Venice.  It is also one of his most extensive series of Gerusalemme Liberata. It was the first time the painter was inspired by a poem as his subject. While Tiepolo has been criticized for not staying true to text in his choice of setting, it is clear that the artist, as well as the patron, had a clear knowledge of the epic and wanted to convey that through the four chosen scenes.

The first painting depicts Rinaldo enchanted by Armida. This scene is taken from canto 14, Armida sees Rinaldo sleeping and becomes so amazed by his beauty she captures the soldier using flowers to tie his feet and arms. She then abducts him in her chariot. Tasso writes:

But when she fixed her gaze upon him and saw how calm and countenance

He breathes, and how charming a manner laughs about his lovely eyes,

Though they be closed (now what will it be if he opens them?), first she

Stands still in suspense, and then sits down beside him, and feels her every

Wrath becalmed while she gazes upon him; and now she bends so above

His handsome face that she seems Narcissus at the spring. (Tasso, Torquato, Gerusalemme Liberata)

Tiepolo uses this scene to depict Armida as the dominant figure. She is posed above the sleeping Rinaldo on top of her chariot surrounded by clouds and a flowing drapery. Rinaldo on the other hand is sleeping and shown as completely powerless.

In the next painting Tiepolo depicts Rinaldo and Armida in her garden. This scene is taken from canto 16 in which Rinaldo is captivated by Armida as she gazes into a mirror. . While the two lovers share a private moment together in her garden the fellow soldiers, Carlo and Ubaldo anticipating the moment to seize Rinaldo and bring him back to duty. Tasso writes:

From the lover’s side hung down (strange armor) a crystal mirror shining

And clear. He rose, and held it up for her between his hands, the chosen  vessel for the mysteries of Love. He with enkindled, she with laughing eyes,

In varying objects gaze on one object only: she makes herself a mirror out

Of glass, and he makes himself mirrors oh her limpid eyes. (Tasso, Torquato Gerusalemme Liberata)

            At this moment Armida appears to be on an equal level with Rinaldo. She no longer appears dominant; instead they are both shown as two figures in love. She is still surrounded by drapery yet her expression is much softer and human. Also, only one of her breasts is exposed in this painting, while both were in the first, this alludes to her new modesty and vulnerability with her lover. Rinaldo holds the same transfixed positioning as Armida did in the first painting. This demonstrates Tiepolo’s knowledge for the text for it was upon Armida’s first encounter with Rinaldo that she fell in love with him, and he her while in the garden. More importantly, the soldiers, lurking in the background are also true to the text and give the viewer a foreshadowing of what is to come.

            In the next scene Tiepolo captures the moment in canto 16 when Rinaldo must abandon Armida. Rinaldo is persuaded by his soldiers to leave Armida in order to pursue his Christian duty in the crusades. Similar to the Aeneid this scene depicts a hero making a personal sacrifice in order to follow his destiny and obtain glory. The difficulty of this act can be seen in Armida’s reaction.

“Wretch! Do I yet presume? Do I yet make my boast of a rejected beauty

That gets me nothing?” She wanted to say more, but her tears interrupted,

That welled up like a spring from the mountain rock. Then she seeks to

Grasp his hand or cloak, suppliant in gesture; and he steps back; he

Struggles and overcomes; love finds entrance closed, and tears the exit. (Tasso, Torquato, Gerusalemme Liberata)

            Armida’s destruction is depicted very clearly through Tiepolo. Both of her arms are raised toward Rinaldo with her head turned upward. All of a sudden there is a role reversal and Rinaldo is standing above Armida as she gazes in a pleading gesture up to him. He holds his armor firmly and while Tiepolo might depict a sense of hesitancy as Rinaldo stares back at Armida, there is a boat in the background, alluding to his inevitable decision to leave the sorceress.

            It is perhaps the last scene that truly exemplifies Tiepolo and the patron’s knowledge and interpretation of the importance of Gerusalemme Liberata. It is taken from canto 17 when the Magician of Ascalona reveals a shield to Rinaldo that displays the feats of his ancestors.  This in turn inspires Rinaldo to serve his Christian duty by battling the pagan enemy.  

            Armida is no longer present in this scene. Rinaldo stands tall and erect with his hair pulled back. He listens intently to the magus and appears to be the warrior he was meant to be.  This painting changes the message of the series. No longer are the paintings about an amorous story between a sorceress and a soldier, they serve a bigger picture, that being to amplify the glory and honor of one knight, and therefore the patron of the work.

            While Tiepolo painted many works concerning scenes from Gerusalemme Liberata, these four paintings seem the most detailed and are the only ones commissioned in Venice. This fact could have an effect on the choices Tiepolo made. It is clear with the last painting that the patron wanted to amplify his honor through the main message of the epic, that being the importance of Christian duty and honor. Scholar Keith Christianson states, “The salient point here is that Tiepolo’s delightful sequence captivates its audience at the same time that it asserts an ethical imperative” (Christianson Keith,Giambattista Tiepolo) Nevertheless there is more than one interpretation of these paintings.

            The interaction between Rinaldo and Armida changes throughout the series until it seems that the two form a role reversal, and when one was strong the other is now weak. Rinaldo simulates the life of a soldier in this series. He is first seen sleeping peacefully like an infant, completely innocent of his surroundings and the dangers of Armida hovering over him. In the next scene he appears as a love-struck boy, captivated by a woman. In the third scene he is shown making an emotional decision between love and duty. In the last scene Rinaldo is standing tall and proud. He is an honorable soldier with the Magus by his side.

            Armida, on the other hand, is the opposite of Rinaldo. In the first scene she hovers over the innocent soldier, appearing like a powerful sorceress. In the next she is more vulnerable, with one breast exposed and on equal level with Rinaldo. In the third scene she is reduced to a crouching begging position looking up at Rinaldo, as if he is now her superior. And finally in the last scene she is reduced to nothing, her importance has completely disappeared.

            If this were strictly about a love story then Tiepolo could have depicted the last canto of Gerusalemme Liberata when Armida is converted to Christianity and joins Rinaldo. However this was not just a love story, and it is an important element that is missed within Tiepolo’s work. This begs the question, what is Tiepolo’s focus? Is it the growth of Rinaldo or the fading of Armida? And why? Christianson states, “Thus, Rinaldo’s condition improves from canvas to canvas, at the same time that Armida’s physical state and moral standing deteriorate.” (Christianson Keith, Giambattista Tiepolo)

            While Armida may not be Tiepolo’s main focus, she is certainly a factor in this series and her presence is just as important as her absence. As stated before, this is the only series commissioned in Venice, and at the time the city was entering into a state of decline. While Tiepolo might not have intentionally alluded to this idea, there is a strong connection between Venice and Armida, both as super powers, who slowly weaken through time and experience. 

Originally I wanted to compare Torquato Tasso’s description of Rinaldo and Armida’s relationship to Giambattista Tiepolo’s interpretation in his art. I anticipated that Tiepolo focused more on Rinaldo and Armida’s love while Tasso focused more on Rinaldo as a hero, overcoming his love affair with a sorceress. In some ways I have found these predictions to be accurate in others I found Tiepolo’s interpretation very similar to Tasso’s.

            I have decided to use Anthony Van Dyck’s paintings of Rinaldo and Armida (1628-1632) as a comparison to Tiepolo’s, as well as Giuseppe Cades’ (1785). Van Dyck was painting roughly a century before Tiepolo and also painted a series of works illustrating Rinaldo and Armida’s relationship. Cades’ on the other hand, was a contemporary of Tiepolo however his painting of Rinaldo and Armida differs greatly from Tiepolo’s series.

            I will analyze how each painter interprets the love story between Rinaldo and Armida, who chooses to portray Armida as a victim? Who chooses to portray Armida as a sorceress? My main focus will be on Tiepolo’s series and how his differ from Cades’ and Van Dyck.  Ultimately, judging by these differences, I would like to address the question, is Tiepolo’s unique interpretation geographically based? In other words, is it Venice that drives him to use Armida as a victim rather than a sorceress? 

Rinaldo had to play a major part in this epic if originally Tasso dedicated a poem to him. One could argue that Tasso’s main emphasis on Rinaldo and not the other love affairs, directly influenced other artists.

More interesting, Tasso was originally influenced to write this epic in Venice, could this effect the way Venetian artists illustrated the texts? Does it give Tiepolo the upper hand?

In my paper proposal I originally wanted to compare the way Tasso (writing a century before Tiepolo’s works) interpreted Armida and Rinaldo’s relationship in literature to the way Tiepolo interprets it in his art. I felt that Tiepolo paid more attention to the relationship while Tasso focused on Rinaldo as a hero and the sacrifices he had to make for honor.

Now, I would like to carry that a step further, study the ways other artists such as Van Dyke and Giuseppe Cades chose to interpret Jerusalem Delivered compared to Tiepolo.  I found Cades’ painting of Armida Gazing at the sleeping Rinaldo to appear much darker than Tiepolo’s. At the end of this post Cades’ painting is displayed above Tiepolo’s. Both illustrate the same scene, when Armida first encounters Rinaldo and falls in love with him. Cades’ painting was produced in Rome around 1785 while Tiepolo’s was produced in Venice in the 1740s.

So here is my question, judging by the way Tiepolo interprets Rinaldo and Armida’s love in Jerusalem Liberated, compared to other artists producing the same subject matter at the time, was he more influenced by Venetian painters? Or the literary work and his contemporaries?

How does Venice (meaning Tiepolo) produce this myth compared to other painters who were not Venetian? And Why?

Your topic sounds very interesting. It will be interesting to see how you combine chemistry and art even more as the paper evolves. It really sounds like the combination of a science experiment and an art history paper. I look forward to finding out what building materials are more sustainable than others and if that has had an effect on recent building plans in Venice.