THE ENCOUNTER OF LEO AND ATTILA (Paper presented in Athens in 1989) "Some might regard this as a historic meeting.

But what is history? Errors scrawled on sheepskins. Fallible minds pretending to know the past. There are no historians here. I shall not write about this meeting. Not, I think, will you. We are free from history. And yet we are history. Is my Latin too rapid for you? Good, I see it is not. I was asked to come and see you."1 (Words of Pope Leo to Attila during their meeting on the banks of the river Mincio) This paper does not deal with the subject you expect, namely with Attila, the Scourge of God, the king of the Huns, who terrorized the Roman Empire for more than 20 years. Thus the title of this paper: 'representations of Attila the Hun in Renaissance Rome' is not entirely correct. It should have been 'Representations of the meeting of Attila the Hun and Pope Leo I the Great in Renaissance and Baroque Vatican' I shall try to explain that the representations of this encounter are an answer to, or a reflection of the political situation of that time. You may say that these images have an ideological content. In short this paper does not deal with the use (or abuse, if you like) of history in modern times. Most people know Attila as the Scourge of God. He was the king of the Huns, nomads who came from the East. The ferocity of the Huns in general and that of Attila especially is a common place in the literature since the Middle Ages. One has compared and still compares the Germans with the Huns. Such a comparison was made by The Times magazine on the occasion of the reunion of the two Germanies. Another example is that in an editorial of the Greek right-wing newspaper Estia 'the withdrawal' was requested 'from the martyred island of Cyprus which is suffering under the ruthless boot of the Turkish Attila.' The reason why Attila and the Huns have this reputation is not the subject of this lecture, but I must say that every more or less important opponent of the Roman Empire or of the Christian Church has acquired this epithet. For instance the Saracens dared to conquer the Holy Land and invaded Spain. Europe sent its bravest sons to reconquer that region. In the western literary sources the Saracens are depicted as ferocious, cruel,... This picture of the Arabic speaking people has survived until now. The crusaders on the other hand were brave, fair, ... men. In Arabic literature you find the opposite picture. I think Attila was no more ferocious than his opponents, than Aetius, the general of the West Roman emperor. Besides, to understand Attila you have to place him in the political situation of his period and in the social context of his tribe. Attila and his Huns become important for the West Roman empire, when he invaded in 451 Gaul and he was 'defeated' in the battle at the Catalaunian Plains. In fact, it was no defeat -the struggle was stopped because it became too dark-, but he retreated after an indecisive battle. However, the Huns have influenced the history of the West Roman empire much earlier than this. Until 439 they enabled Aetius and the Gallo-Roman landlords to maintain themselves 1 A. Burgess, Hun, in The Devil's Mode, New York-Singapore, 1989, p. 255.

with success against other 'barbaric' tribes and bagaudae, gangs composed of peasants, slaves and brigands. In 452 he invaded Italy. He captured Aquileia, Patavium (Padua), Vicenza, Mediolanum (Milan) and many other cities. He hesitated however to cross the Apennines and to plunder Rome. On this occassion there was the notorious meeting of Attila and Leo I the Great on the banks of the river Mincio. Attila concluded peace with this embassy and he withdrew his troops north of the Alps. He died one year later, on his wedding night. (453) The unexpected withdrawal of Attila gave and still gives cause for speculation, which, according the school of thought or ideology of the researchers, either increases or reduces the importance of the papal intervention; or gives a psychological explanation for the behaviour of Attila (as superstition), or revalues the importance of the political and the military action of the East Roman emperor Marcianos and his general Aetios. Still others account for Attila's conduct by the threat of famine and plague. In my view, you can't doubt the historicity of the embassy of pope Leo I, but doubts about the impact on Attila are justified. Although it is not clear why the pope should have been sent, there are other examples of clerical embassies. During the siege of Toulouse, the capital of the Goths, in 439 the Goths sent certain bishops as ambassadors to the leader of the enemies to beg for terms. I think that the version of this encounter by Cassiodorus is more reliable. His account of the embassy is very brief. The role of the pope was limited when he concluded peace as a representative of the emperor in the name of the emperor. Moreover Attila is often represented as an opponent of the Roman Emperor and not as one of the Church. The only testimony written by a contemporary historian is that of Prosper Tironis, a christian historian who lived in the fifth century AD. He wrote a universal history ending in the year 455. He said 'our most blessed Pope Leo, relying on the help of God, undertook this business; and, when the whole delegation had been received with fitting honours, Attila the King, rejoiced so much in the presence of our most exalted Pope that he both gave instructions to abstain from war, and withdrew beyond the Danube after promising peace.'2 In the Historiae romanae, a history written by Paulus Diaconus in the eighth century, the pope is accompanied by a man, who threatened Attila with a sword and who scared him.

The Chronicon Novalicense, a manuscript written between 1027 and 1050, is very important for the picture it gives of Attila in Italy. In this manuscript, Attila is nicknamed for the first time `Flagellum Dei', the Scourge of God.

2 I thank Geoffrey Tanner for the translation.

Only from the fourteenth and fifteenth century onwards the representation of Attila as an enemy of Christianity becomes very popular and wide spread in Italy. He is also used as a kind of contrast and as excuse to idiolize certain aristocratic families.

A miniature in the Saechschen Weltchronik, dated in the second half of the thirteenth century, depicts two people in front of a tent. It is the first representation of the encounter of Leo and Attila. The first representation of the encounter of pope Leo I and Attila in the Vatican is a fresco painted by Raphael in one of the private rooms of pope Julius II, the Stanza d'Eliodoro (15121514). The presiding theme of the whole cycle of fresco's in this room is the divine intervention in defence of the integrity of and the spiritual and temporal patrimony of the Church. On one of the two main walls he painted the 'expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple' and on the other 'the repulsion of Attila from the Walls by Leo the Great'. On the two smaller walls he painted 'the angel delivering St Peter from prison' and the 'Miracle of Bolsena'. The fresco which concerns our study, is the 'Repulsion of Atttila from the Walls by Leo the Great' (fig. 1). It is possible to distinguish three different groups of people.

On the right, six horsemen and two people on foot are depicted. One of the latter is holding a horse without horseman, the other the white horse. They form a closed group. In the center of this group there is a man riding on a white horse -the only white in the whole painting. He is wearing a cloak and a tiara, a bee-hive shaped head-covering with 3 crowns. This identifies him immediately as the pope. He is holding his right hand up. Next to him -extreme right- there are two men, who are identified as cardinals by their clothing. Behind him there are 3 horsemen, of whom the nearest is holding a cross. On the left there is a much larger group in action. In the middle of it a bearded man, riding on a black horse, is depicted. He is wearing a crown, which identifies him as the most important man of the group. Above his scale-armour he has a cloak. He is looking at the two floating men right above. He is leaning back as if he is going to fall of his horse. He is holding his arms behind him. Behind him a soldier is holding a waving banner, and signalling for the army to advance. All soldiers wear scale-armours. Raphael also painted helmets with unplumed crests and circular trumpets. On the right -above the pope- you can see two floating figures. Both are bearded and the nimbus around their head identifies them as saints. The person to the extreme right is holding in his right hand a sword and in his left two keys. The keys hint at the identity of this saint. Since the fifth century St Peter is represented frequently with keys which, according to St.Mathew, Jesus

has given him. The figure next to him has also a sword in his right hand, but he is pointing with his forefinger of his left hand to the left. This scene is identified as the encounter of pope Leo I the Great and Attila. The man with the tiara, riding on a white horse, is pope Leo. He is holding his hand forward in order to stop the opposing group. His retinue is calm, silent and exudes self-confidence, authority and belief in God. Attila, riding on a black horse, is depicted on the same level as Leo. His men are nervous, confused, full of contradictions (the men are marching in different directions) and in action. According to the literary tradition, Attila decided to withdraw his troops after St Peter and St Paul appeared unto him and threatened him with death if he should not listen to the pope and he should sack Rome. This event is represented by this fresco. One of the saints in the sky is already identified as St Peter by his keys. According to the literary tradition the other must be St Paul. This is indicated by his beard, which is somewhat longer and wilder than those of the others. According to tradition, the encounter was on the banks of the river Mincio. Raphael, however, moved the meeting from there to the walls of Rome. In the background you can distinguish the Colosseum, an obelisk and an aquaduct. The presence of St Peter and St Paul, the patron-saints of Rome, is another indication that this encounter took place nearby Rome. According to an ancient tradition, they converted Rome together. The keys of St Peter are not only a symbol of his power in heaven, but they are also the keys of the city-gates of Rome. This is no ordinary representation of the meeting of Leo and Attila. In the figure of Leo the Great we have a portrait of Leo X. Also one of the cardinals has the features of Leo X. In a preliminary drawing, kept in Oxford, we see Julius II as Leo the Great, but he died in February 1513, before the freso was finished. At approximately the same date as the fresco, the poet Gyraldi published his Hymnus ad divum Leonem Pont. Max.. In this poem he honoured Leo X for chasing the French out of Italy by describing the meeting of Leo and Attila. Probably the fresco deals with the same subject as the poem. As in the poem, the aim of this fresco is to idolize pope Leo X. This is indicated by the fact that Julius II is represented in the Oxford-drawing and Leo X on the fresco. The representation of St Peter and St Paul together, symbol of the unity of the Church, is a call to all christian kings to settle their mutual feuds and to fight togehter. The Galleria delle carte geografiche is named after the 40 topographical maps of the Popal States which are represented on the walls of the gallery. The gallery is on the second floor of the western part of the Vatican and it is 120 m. in length. These maps are very important as a testimony of the knowledge of geography and cartography during the sixteenth century. Besides an enormous variety of historical tableaux, painted on the ceiling, there are landscapes and arabesques. They were painted between 1580 and 1583, at the instruction of pope Gregorius XIII. The historical scenes, painted on the ceiling are based on the maps on the walls. The pictures represent various events in the history of the Church and scenes from the lives of the saints. One of the selected scenes is the encounter of pope Leo I the Great with Attila. To be

perfectly clear there is an inscription mentioning S.LEO.PONT.MAX.ATTILA.FVRENTEM.REPRIMIT (fig. 2). This painting does not possess the same artistic qualities as the freso of Raphael. You can distinguish 3 groups. On your right there is large group of horsemen. The number of spears support this impression. The painter made no effort to depict the Huns as recognizable 'barbarians'. Attila is represented in the middle of the group. He is identifiable by the crown. He is bearded, has a cloak and apart of a loincloth he is naked. Attila holds his left hand up in greeting and his right hand is bent. He is riding on a white horse. On the left a group of 8 horsemen is depicted. On the same level as Attila there is someone riding on a white horse. He is wearing a tiara with 3 crowns, a garment and a cloak. It is possible to identify this man as pope Leo I the Great. A man on foot is leading his horse by the reins.

Two figures high in the sky form the third group. Both are wearing the same cloths and both are holding a sword in the right hand. They are both looking at Attila.

In this painting, the landscape has a more prominent place than in the fresco of Raphael. The city-walls, the gate, the towers and other fortifications are clearly visible. In the background a bridge over a river is depicted. You can distinguish separate buildings far away. It is clear that this painting has different aim from the fresco of Raphael. In the former, the event plays a secondary role. In comparison with the landscape the figures are small. I think that this painting is only ornamental. The third representation of the encounter of Leo I the Great and Attila is a relief for the altar of pope Leo the Great in St Peter's (fig. 3). It was under Paul V that the relicts of Leo I had been placed, together with those of II, III and IV, under the altar of the Blessed Virgin of the Column. After the decision in 1626 to close the door leading to the church of St Martha, a new altar was constructed at the left of the western end of the basilica (it will be remembered that St Peter's has the high altar at the West). It was intended to commission a painting of the 'Encounter of Leo and Attila' from Guido Reni, but difficulties arose, and the Congregation of the Works turned instead to someone else. But nothing came of this project either. The main problems which confronted the painter, are the following: inevitably comparisons would be made between this painting and that of Raphael in the nearby Vatican Stanze. The site was also unsuitable for such a subject (it was too small). The light was unfavourable. Finally the paintings could not withstand the condensation and the humidity. Therefore it had been decided in 1646, under Innocentius X, to commission a marble relief from Alessandro Algardi. The importance of this relief -apart from its artistic aspect- is that it is the

first time that a carved altar was commissioned for such a prominent location and its size was also extraordinary. Its size was perhaps the least daunting aspect of Algardi's task. It may be that white marble suffers less from the darkness of the site than a painting would. To overcome the problem of the size Algardi proposed a change in the iconography. He proposed that the encounter should take place on foot. So revolutionary was this proposal that a special committee was deputed to decide 'whether in this ''history'' the Blessed Pope should be placed on horseback or on foot'. The answer would seem to have been a qualified approval for Algardi's initiative, since, although both Leo and Attila are standing, the sculptor must have been instructed to introduce not only the head of Attila's horse behind the Hun, but also, at the extreme right the head of a more docile horse, from which we must assume that the Pope has just dismounted. That it was Algardi's idea is evident in that his preliminary model does not include Leo's horse, modified on the instructions of his ecclesiastical advisors. The formula of the meeting of Leo and Attila on foot is found in two other and older representations of the subject, which would probably have been known to Algardi. One of them is a painting by Franscesco Borgani (1614) above the high altar of the parish church of Governelo, where the historic encounter took place. This small town is not far from Mantua and the likelihood that Algardi would have known it, is increased by the fact that the church had been built by Gabriele Bertazzoli, the architect and engineer under whose auspices the sculptor had arrived at the court of Mantua. The other image is an engraving illustrating Giulio Strozzi's poem 'La Venetia edificata', published in 1624. The relief is divided into three parts. On the right a group of five people is depicted. In the foreground there is a young man in kneeling position. His youth stands in contrast with the dignified old age of the man behind him. This bearded man is wearing a long garment and only one crown on his tiara. Perhaps one member of the sub-committee pointed out to him that at this early date the pope had only one crown, the one given by emperor Constantine to pope Sylvester. The second crown was added by pope Bonefacius VIII in the 13th century. Such care for the minutiae of icongraphic accuracy had not troubled his predecessors. One of St Leo's hands is thrust out to halt the invaders, the other points to the Cross. On the left is another group, composed of many people. Attila is depicted in the foreground. He is recognizable by his crown. A cloak is tied over his shoulder which is secured with a brooch.His right leg is put forward, as if he were running straight out of the relief. He is holding his hand right up and he is looking up in the direction of the saints. In the representation of Attila's followers, Algardi has played down the unambiguous indications of recession into depth. He used an illusionistic device, whereby the soldiers behind Attila, now mounted on horses, are raised above him, yet we tend involuntarily to interpret them as if we were looking at them from a raised viewpoint, and to see them as further back than they

really are. This, together with the general confusion, and the number of spears and ensigns, creates the impression of a vast horde, halted, and uncertain of its direction. There is in fact no tradition for the representation of Huns. Raphael introduced a soldier covered in scale-armour, but Algardi has made no effort to depict the Huns as recognizable barbarians. Above them are the two Apostles. St Peter is now almost horizontal and St Paul swoops down on the invaders. The cloak of St Paul is blowing forward. Both have a sword in their right hand. St Paul is pointing with his left hand to the route by which the Huns must retreat and St Peter to his successor and earthly representative. The putti, the little fat monsters, are pushing the clouds back to reveal the vision of St Peter and St Paul. Nature is represented by one tree behind pope Leo and his companions. The differences in the leaves on the tree were no doubt introduced to mask the line between 2 of the 5 blocks of marble. The plants at the bottom have been added to hide the transition between the ground of the stage and the backplane. Algardi introduced some archaeological details, such as the circular trumpets, helmets with unplumed crests and, a dragon standards. A dragon in horizontal form is an ensign found on classical monuments. This standard, though later adopted by the Roman conquerors, had originally been used by the Parthians, Dacians and other Nothern peoples, but the other ensigns look entirely Roman. The head of the train-bearer is based on the antique statue of the 'Gaul Killing his Wife', well known to Algardi from the collection of cardinal Ludovisi, who was his patron in Rome. Pietro da Cortona, a painter, was the first to use the type with a flowing beard, his hair parted in the middle and growing almost horizontally in wavy curls. Yet in St Paul we find Algardi turning to Pietro da Cortona. But Algardi was not seriously concerned with archaeology. His reliefs depict the salvation of Rome through the action of St Leo the Great, and the miraculous victory of the Christian Church over the invading infidel. In this image the principal figures stand out clearly and unmistakably, namely the Pope, the Hun and the 2 Apostles. The gap in the center of the composition -emphasized (not weakened) by the bridge created by the Hun's armour-bearing page and the arm of the officer behind- illustrates vividly the conflict between them and the forces they represent. The confusion of Attila's army, as yet unaware of their leader's historic decision, contrasts with the quiet stability of the saint and the calm of the priests behind him. You have to look at this relief in the light of the political situation of that time. Since 1645 Cromwell was engaged in prosecuting the Catholics in England. In 1645 Spain and its allies was fighting against the Turks for the hegemony over the Mediterranean Sea. At that time there were problems between the pope and France. The connection is not as obvious as in the fresco of Raphael, but it does exist.