Botticelli's family and finances in the 1490's: Santa Maria Nuova and the San Marco

altarpiece
Author(s): Andrew C. Blume
Source: Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz, 38. Bd., H. 1 (1994), pp.
154-164
Published by: {kif}, Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz, Max-Planck-Institut
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27654376
Accessed: 08-05-2020 18:59 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content 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 support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz, Max-Planck-Institut is collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access to Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in
Florenz

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Andrew C. Blume: BOTTICELLI'S FAMILY AND FINANCES IN THE 1490'S: SANTA MARIA
NUOVA AND THE SAN MARCO ALTARPIECE

It was almost a century ago that Herbert Home, in his unsurpassed monograph on Botticelli, brought
his critical acumen to bear on the issues concerning that artist's financial condition towards the end of the
fifteenth century.1 Home examined Vasari's assertion in the first edition of the Lives that "... ostinato alia
setta di quella parte, faccendo continuamente il piagnone e deviandosi dal lavoro, invecchiando e
dimenticando si condusse in molto malessere. Aveva lavorato molte cose ... a Lorenzo Vecchio d'i Medici,
il quale mentre visse sempre lo sovvenne"2 and the much more emphatic position of the second edition
which states: "Perciocch? essendo ostinato a quella parte, e facendo, come si chiamavano allora, il piagnone,
si ^dlvfo dal lavorare: onde in ultimo si trovo vecchio e povero di sorte, che se Lorenzo de' Medici mentre
che visse ... non l'avesse sovvenuto, e poi gli amici e molti uomini da bene stati affezionati alla sua virt?,
si sarebbe quasi morto di fame."3 Both editions of the Lives go on to state that Botticelli "guadagn? assai;
ma tutto, per aver poco governo e per trascurataggine, mando male. Finalmente condottosi vecchio e disutile
... si mor? ... d'anni settantotto."4
To refute these contentions, Home cited a notarial act to which Botticelli and his younger brother,
Simone, referred in their 1498 tax return.5 This act, and its subsequent reporting to the officials of the
Decima repubblicana, show that Botticelli paid the hospital of Santa Maria Nuova 155 fiorini larghi for a
perpetual lease on a farm in the parish of San Sepolcro, beyond the Porta a San Frediano.6 The lease
stipulated that the property could be passed to his male descendants but would thereafter revert to the
hospital. Such a farm would provide an income and some security, and Home noted that "these docu
ments go far to disprove the statements which Vasari interpolated in the second edition of the Lives ...
The more measured account which Vasari gives in the first edition is far nearer in accordance with the
contents of these documents. That Botticelli might have [at one time] been a comparatively rich man,
whereas in 1495, as his portata shows, he was a comparatively poor one, is evident enough."7
Patricia Rubin has recently suggested that "one aspect of the revision [of the Lives in the 1568 edi
tion] was the reinforcement of the theme of Medici magnificence."8 In the case of Botticelli's supposedly
sorry financial condition, the shift in Vasari's text from describing a kind of benign misfortune in the first
edition to proposing a ruin blamed on Savonarola and crediting the artist's survival to Lorenzo and his
friends in the second can certainly be seen as a bow to the author's patron.
Regardless of Vasari's motives, historians have had to wrestle with his claims. Hitherto unpublished
material among the records of Santa Maria Nuova and in the notarial protocols of Ser Antonio di Ser
Anastasio Vespucci further buttress Home's observations and discoveries, and also help us to form much
fuller picture of Botticelli's economic and family situation in the 1490s. The most important of these new
documents is a series of records in the accounts of the hospital of Santa Maria Nuova that together amount
to a kind of savings account for the years 1492 to 1494. Santa Maria Nuova appears to have functioned
as a bank from no later than 1464, when the first of the surviving Libri di depositi was begun.9 Botticelli's
account, however, is not recorded in these books. Rather that artist's name first appears in the hospital's
Quademo di cassa for 1492-96.10 On July 20, 1492, Botticelli brought forty fiorini d'oro larghi to the
hospital. Several months later, on October 6 of the same year, 138 lire, 15 soldi piccioli di grossi [sic] were
paid into the account by Ruberto di Giovanni de' Ricci & Co., bankers. The third and final deposit
recorded in this book was made on November 8, 1492. This was a payment in the amount of 53 florins,
4 lire. This payment was also made on Botticelli's behalf by a third party: the Arte di Porta Santa Maria,
the silk weaver's guild. At this time the account totalled 40 fiorini larghi d'oro in oro and 434 lire di grossi.
On December 29, 1492, the account was consolidated, reckoned in fiorini larghi di grossi, and trans
ferred to another series of account books, the Libri maestri.11 Here the account was valued at 121 fiorini,
16 soldi, 8 danari. The transfer was probably made for accounting reasons, as the monies in the Quademo
di cassa were in two different coins and had never been entered into the hospital's Libri di entrata. The
transfer allowed for the payments to be recorded not only in the Libro di entrata but also in the hospital's
own capital.12 The account is next found in the subsequent volume of the Libri maestri.13 A new record
for Botticelli was begun on February 11, 1492 (st. f.), when he deposited 21 florins, 13 soldi in a com
bination of gold and silver money. A further 10 fiorini larghi di grossi was paid to this account by Ruberto
di Giovanni de' Ricci & Co., bankers, on May 17, 1493.14 Both these entries are also recorded in an
extant Libro di entrata.^ The accounts in the two Libri maestri were consolidated at the time Botticelli
bought his podere on April 19, 1494. By this time he had amassed 153 florins, 9 soldi, 8 danari, just short
of the 155 florin purchase price of the farm. The balance was paid in two installments during June 1494.16

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece 155

Botticelli's first involvement with the San Sepolcro property can actually be dated to 1491, when he
and his older brother, Giovanni, took out a three year lease on the very farm that Sandro was to buy
in 1494. The document, among the protocols of Ser Antonio Vespucci, states that a certain Niccolo di
Simone, a silk weaver, who was at that time renting the property from Santa Maria Nuova, sublet the
farm to Giovanni and Alessandro di Mariano di Vanni for an initial payment of nine florins and two
further payments in the second year, in all amounting to 44 lire.11 In total, the brothers paid about sixteen
large florins to rent the property.18 The borders and location of the property as described in this instru
ment are exactly the same as those described in the 1494 deed of purchase, originally published by Home.
The lease on this property was taken jointly by the two brothers and, upon Giovanni's death, the property
would be Sandro's responsibility. Although the agreement dates back to 1491, the document was drawn
up on April 12, 1492, two months before the date of Botticelli's first deposit at Santa Maria Nuova.
Botticelli and his brother apparently intended from the beginning to rent the property until Sandro could
save up the capital to buy it. The advantage of this action, however, is not apparent unless Botticelli, in
these years, wanted or needed either the wine and fruit it produced or the income these products gen
erated.19
Given the mention of other members of the family in the 1494 notarial act, Home believed that the
"purchase had been made jointly by the two brothers [Sandro and Simone]".20 Ronald Lightbown, in his
monograph on the artist, stated that "Sandro joined with the rest of his family in buying" the property.21
These assumptions, however, are unfounded. Certainly Botticelli was acting in the best interests of his
jobless brother, for whom, as we can see from their joint tax declaration of 1498, he was financially
responsible. This purchase was even in the best interests of Botticelli's relatively wealthy nephews, Amedeus
and Benincasa22, with whom he did not appear to have had the best of relationships, although he shared
a house with them at this time.23 The fact remains that the Hospital's accounts of the farm purchase make
it clear that it was Sandro, and Sandro alone, as head of his branch of the family, who acted in this
matter.24 The 1494 documents concerning the property make no mention of any other principals in the
transaction or of any proxies or intermediaries. Botticelli is listed as having sole title to the accounts in
Santa Maria Nuova and it was he who brought in the money, most probably from his activity as a
painter.25
The substance of Botticelli's Santa Maria Nuova account provides us with some concrete information
about Botticelli's income during this period. In the space of about one year, he made five deposits with
the hospital. The first question that springs to mind is whether these deposits represent payments for
works of art. Only one of the records is specific enough to relate it to a known painting. On November
8, 1492, the camarlingo of the Arte della Seta, Bartolo di Francesco Bartolelli, handed over 53 florins, 4
soldi larghi di grossi to Brother Francesco, the camarlingo of Santa Maria Nuova, to be placed in Botticelli's
account.26 Although there is no concrete documentary evidence, such as a contract, series of payments, or
ricordanze, to show that Sandro Botticelli executed a painting for the Arte della Seta, it has been estab
lished very clearly by circumstantial documentary evidence, the early sources, and the study of provenance
that the Coronation of the Virgin with saints, now in the Uffizi (fig. 1), was indeed painted for the guild's
chapel in the Church of San Marco in Florence sometime after 1488.27 The Santa Maria Nuova deposit,
therefore, must be connected to this project.
Two previously known documents discuss the altar of the Arte della Seta in San Marco. The first is
a Repertorio di obblighi di messe from around 1525 in which the friars record the legacy in 1488 of 40 lire
per year for the annual masses there.28 It goes on to state that "the said guild, in addition to these things,
made the altarpiece, for which they spent one hundred large gold ducats." The second is the Statuti of the
guild for the period 1335 to 1578.29 Deliberating on April 29, 1490, the consuls of the guild record that
these annual memorial masses were voted on, approved, and the 40 lire authorized, "the men of the guild
having the care and custody of the church of San Marco in Florence, and having there a chapel, and
having ordered its construction and adornment". From a knowledge of the first document only, Mesnil
believed that the altarpiece was commissioned around 1488.30 Home, knowing both documents, concluded
from this evidence that by 1490 the chapel must have been nearing completion and that the altarpiece
must, therefore, have been commissioned sometime between 1488 and 1490.31 Lightbown, writing that
"the [guild] document seems to suggest that the first work that was undertaken [in the chapel] was the
architectural framework", proposed that the painting must have been executed sometime after April 1490.32
Newly discovered material among the conventual records of San Marco, now in the Biblioteca Medicea
Laurenziana in Florence, gives us a more precise date for the first payment of the alms, of the first use
of the guild's altar, and, by extension, of the altarpiece.33 Although the date of consecration remains
unknown, the altar and the annual masses are first mentioned in San Marco's Libro di ricordanze around
May 1492, when the friars note the donation of the alms, referring directly to the decision of the Arte
as recorded in the Statuti. Below this is retroactively recorded the first payment, made on October 6,

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 156 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece

1491, and the first mass that was said there. The masses are dutifully recorded in this book on the date
of payment for the following two years. In 1503, when the first ten years of the agreement were expired,
the friars reiterated the terms of the original agreement, referring to the first ricordanze of 1492 and again
to the Statuti of the guild. Here, they explicitly state that the masses were to be said in the liChappella
di Sancto Alo"34, the patron saint of the goldsmiths and one of the saints depicted in Botticelli's altarpiece.
If masses were not said in the chapel until as late as 1491, it would not be illogical to assume that the
chapel was not ready before that date, thus allowing us to push the date of Botticelli's altarpiece into
1491. These ricordanze also state that Carlo Gondi was the officer of the guild responsible for this dona
tion.35 It is conceivable that Gondi was also responsible for the altar, and it may have been he who
supervised its decoration, including Botticelli's altarpiece.
Although the November 1492 payment by the Arte to Botticelli must be related to the San Marco
altarpiece, it does not necessarily follow that this was the delivery date of the painting. Patrons certainly
did not always pay artists promptly and artists often collected payments before work was completed.36
What it does suggest, however, is that the painting could have been delivered as late as 1492, and that
a date of 1490-92 for the commission and delivery is probably more reasonable that the currently accepted
1488-90, especially given our ability to date the first use of the chapel to 1491.
The 53 florins Botticelli received in November 1492 must represent only part of the money the guild
spent on the painting if we are to believe the 1525 statement that it cost the guild 100 ducats. Some of
the money could have been spent on the frame, and Botticelli may very well have been paid separately
for materials. If this is the case, the payment into Santa Maria Nuova would be the artist's own share.
As the entire sum was left in the account and used to pay for the podere, we might safely assume that
the money did indeed reflect part or all of Botticelli's profit and his actual income from the project after
expenses. If the November 1492 payment is all the money that was owed Botticelli, the artist did not
become a long term creditor of the guild. Other artists, such as Cosimo Rosselli, remained creditors to
their patrons over a long period of time, using the credit as a kind of security or bank account upon
which they could draw when they needed funds.37 Botticelli probably had his farm purchase in mind in
accepting payment into his savings account.
It is unfortunate that the other four deposits in the Santa Maria Nuova account cannot yield this
much information. Of these, two were made by Botticelli himself, in cash and in person. The 40 florins
deposited in July 149238 could conceivably represent payment, or partial payment, for a painting, as the
amount is certainly consistent with other payments that the artist received. We now know that Botticelli
received partial payment of 53 florins for the San Marco altarpiece. On another commission, the Bardi
altarpiece for Santo Spirito, the artist netted 35 florins after expenses39, and in 1488 Botticelli was paid
30 florins, total, for the Annunciation for Benedetto di Ser Francesco Guardi's chapel in Santa Maria in
Cestello, now in the Uffizi.40 The second deposit by Botticelli was on February 11, 1492 (st. f.) and in
the amount of 21 florins, 13 soldi.41 The money was brought in both gold and silver coins. This combi
nation suggests that the money probably does not represent a lump sum payment from one individual,
although a combination payment is not unheard of. Botticelli was paid a share ? probably one third ?
of 31 florins (i.e. gold), 35 lire, 11 soldi (i.e. silver) for work in the Chapel of Saint Zenobius in the
Duomo on December 28, 1492.42 This payment occurred only six weeks prior to Botticelli's February 1492
(st. f.) deposit.
The remaining two deposits into Botticelli's account were made by the bank of Ruberto di Giovanni
di Federico de' Ricci.43 The deposits total 35 fiorini larghi di grossi and it is certainly possible that they
represent two payments for the same debt. The amount is, again, comparable to other known payments
for paintings. Before founding his bank in 1487, Ricci ? who lived in the via del Palagio near the Badia44
? was matriculated as a member of both the Arte della Lana (1481) and the Arte della Seta (1484).45 The
family history records that his descendants would, in the 16th century, turn his into the "first bank of
Florence".46 At the time of the payments to Botticelli, the bank was located at a site "in Calimala", owned
by the Arte dei Medici e Speziali.47 Later in his career, Ricci was to become a member of the Dieci di
Balm (1501) and Gonfaloniere di Giustizia (1515).48 Ricci was, therefore, very well connected in the city
and could have been acting on behalf of any number of institutions or persons, including the Arte della
Seta in the matter of the San Marco altarpiece. It is likely, however, that if Ricci had been acting on
behalf of another person, that third party would have been so named in the transaction. Ricci himself
could also have been the client. The Ricci family does not, unfortunately, figure into the known prov
enance of any Botticelli painting49 and the biography of Ruberto in the 19th-century family history, based
upon the family archives, does not refer to the banker as a patron of the arts.50 The reason behind these
two payments, therefore, must remain a mystery.
The Santa Maria Nuova accounts, along with the notarial acts, give us a glimpse at the facts of the
artist's family life. Although it is fairly clear that Botticelli has his eye on the San Sepolcro property from

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece 157

1 Botticelli, Coronation of the Virgin with saints. Florence, Uffizi.

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 158 AC. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece

1491, and saved up to buy, in effect making time payments before officially receiving the property, we
still might wonder why was it only in July 1492 that Botticelli became particularly interested in his fi
nances, and why he did not continue to save money after buying his podere? There are several factors that
lead us to believe that around 1492 Botticelli might have had pause to think about his future. Lorenzo
de' Medici died in April 1492. Nera, the wife of his older brother Giovanni, died in February 1492 (1493
st. c), Giovanni dying two months later.51 Both may have been ill for some time. Sandro must have been
well aware that Giovanni's death would mean that the family property, amassed for Botticelli's father by
Giovanni during the period 1458-6952, would pass to Giovanni's children, leaving Botticelli and his brother,
Simone, with no assets in immovable goods.53 This situation appears to be contrary to the normal way in
which property passed from one family member to another whereby brothers would receive an equal share
of their parent's property.54 The family may, however, have reached some kind of agreement concerning
inheritance, the record of which has not yet been discovered.55
The systematic saving of money and the way he first rented the San Sepolcro property and then
purchased it demonstrates forethought and financial planning on the artist's part. There is little room to
doubt that Botticelli, during these years, was concerned with his future and that of his brother. Home's
assertion, based on an examination of the artist's 1498 tax return, that Botticelli was not a very rich man
cannot be disputed. Other artists amassed much larger sums at Santa Maria Nuova around the same time.
Leonardo, upon his return from Milan in 1499, deposited 600 large gold florins into an account in the
hospital's Libro di depositi and lived off the money until 1507.56 Michelangelo also had an account at Santa
Maria Nuova into which, between 1505 and 1515, he deposited over 11 000 florins.57 Michelangelo used
much of this money to buy property in and around Florence. On the other hand, for Botticelli to save
153 florins in the year between June 1492 and May 1493 is not inconsequential, especially considering
that all this money was destined for real estate, leaving his daily expenses to be met with other funds.
In fact, according to one chronicler in 1480, one could live quite comfortably with a wife and three
children on 70 per year.58 Botticelli had no such family and was able to save twice that amount in just
one year.
As Botticlli was able to save 153 florins during 1492-93, one can imagine his income to be on a par
with a government official, such as a secretary of the Died who earned 100 to 150 florins per year, or
with a stone mason or smith, who would bring in 175 to 200 per year.59 If one thinks in terms of pure
savings plus expenses, Botticelli might even have earned as much as a forman-architect on a major building
project who could bring in between 250 and 300 florins per year.60
The money Botticelli put away into Santa Maria Nuova for his podere can only be a small portion of
that which he earned in his lifetime, and we are left wondering what happened to the rest of it and why
he did not save any more in Santa Maria Nuova. Perhaps Sandro ? unmarried, childless, and, as far as
we know, debt-free ? did not feel the need to make further capital investments, having provided ad
equately for both his brother and his own retirement.

NOTES

This essay grew out of research for my dissertation, Studies in the religious paintings of Sandro Botticelli,
under the supervision of John Shearman to whom I am grateful for his advice and guidance. Gino Corti most
kindly checked all my transcriptions and helped me transcribe two notarial acts here published. Thanks are also
due to Richard Goldthwaite who shared his knowledge of the Ricci family bank with me. Both Christa Gardner
von Teuffel and Margaret Haines most kindly read and made helpful comments on the text. I would especially
like to express my thanks to Rab Hatfield for his most generous help with the complexities of the Santa Maria
Nuova archive in the Archivio di Stato di Firenze, as well as for reading and commenting upon a draft of the
manuscript.

1 Herbert P. Home, Alessandro Filipepi, commonly called Sandro Botticelli, painter of Florence, London
1908, pp. 266-269.
2 Vasari-Barocchi, vol. Ill, p. 517.
3 Vasari-Milanesi, vol. Ill, p. 318.
4 Ibidem, p. 321.

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece 159

5 Home (n. 1), pp. 266-267 and 359 (doc. XLI). The notarial act is found in Archivio di Stato di Firenze
(hereafter ASF), Notarile antecosimiano 9657 (Ser Giovanni di Ser Marco di Tommaso da Romena,
1491-1496), fol. 97r. The tax return was first published by Gaye, vol. I, pp. 343-344; and then more
fully by Home (n. 1), pp. 359-360. For this document, see ASF, Decima repubblicana, 20 (1498: Santa
Maria Novella, Unicorno), fol. 75r.
6 Home (n. 1), p. 268, established the exact location of the farm.
7 Ibidem, p. 269.
8 Patricia Rubin, Vasari, Lorenzo, and the myth of magnificence, in: Lorenzo il Magnifico e il suo mondo,
ed. by Gian Carlo Garfagnini, Florence 1994, p. 439. Rubin also notes that it is in the Life of Botticelli
that "Lorenzo's is celebrated as 'truly a golden age for men of talents'" (Vasari-Milanesi, vol. Ill, p. 309).
9 ASF, Santa Maria Nuova 5635 (Libro di deposit!, 1464-1479). This series is complete, with a gap
between 1549 and 1666, through the middle of the nineteenth century (see ASF, Santa Maria Nuova
5635-5680).
10 See Appendix, document IV, fol. 308 left and right.
11 See Appendix, document V, fols. 464, 471 left and right. For a good general description of the
Florentine monetary system, see Raymond de Roover, The rise and decline of the Medici bank, 1397
1494, Cambridge (Mass.) 1963, pp. 31-33. For a further discussion of the exchange between gold and
silver coin in Florence, see Richard A. Goldthwaite, The building of Renaissance Florence. An economic
and social history, Baltimore/London 1980, pp. 301-317.
12 Although the records of Santa Maria Nuova are nearly complete for this period, the Libro di entrata
referred to in Appendix, document V, fol. 471 left, is untraced. The addition of these funds to the
Chonto di chassa di danari contanti di questo spedale is found in Appendix, document V, fol. 464.
13 See Appendix, document VI, fol. 59 left and right.
14 See Appendix, document VI, fol. 59 right. Although the deposit reads "per lui da Giovanni di Ruberto
de' Ricci", we can safely assume that this is an error on the part of the accountant as the only
Giovanni di Ruberto de' Ricci alive at this time in Florence was Ruberto di Giovanni's eight year-old
son. See Ruberto di Guido d'Ipolito de' Ricci, Memorie istoriche della famiglia de' Ricci (early 19th
cent.), ms., ASF, Acquisti e doni 100, p. 523.
15 See Appendix, document III, fols. 4v, 12r.
16 See Appendix, document VI, fol. 59 right: June 10 (1 florin, 1 soldo, 4 danari) and June 21 (9 soldi).
The payments are also recorded in Appendix, document III, fols. 48r, 49r.
17 See Appendix, document VIII, fol. 179r.
18 Converting the 44 lire at a rate of approximately 6 lire, 6 soldi per florin.
19 See ASF, Decima repubblicana, 20, fol. 178 (see Home [n. 1], p. 360), where it shows the annual
production of the farm to be four barels of wine and two staia of fruit.
20 Home (n. 1), p. 267.
21 Ronald Lightbown, Sandro Botticelli, Berkeley 1978, vol. I, p. 127.
22 Simone's life and exploits are discussed by Home (n. 1), pp. 266-276, 292, 301. The financial situation
of Botticelli's nephews, Benincasa and Lorenzo, who inherited the family property upon the death of
their father Giovanni di Mariano in 1493, can be seen in their 1498 tax return in ASF, Decima
repubblicana, 20, fol. 178 (see Home [n. 1], p. 360).
23 A notarial act dated September 27, 1490 makes public a promise by those two brothers not to molest
or bother their uncle in any way (see Appendix, document VII, fol. 65Or). While not stating the reasons
for the break between the uncle and his two nephews, the instrument is quite clear in stating that an
intermediary was to be appointed by Giovanni di Mariano to conduct any business concerning those
two parties (see Appendix, document VII, fol. 650v). In this case the appointed intermediary was a
bookseller named Bernardo di Neri d'Andrea Neri. It is interesting to note this rupture since in 1483
Sandro had given Benincasa power of attorney to collect an unpaid debt from Sixtus IV for work in
the Sistine Chapel. See Dario Covi, Botticelli and Pope Sixtus IV, in: Burl. Mag., CXI, 1969, pp. 616
617; the document is found in ASF, Notarile antecosimiano 21066 (Ser Antonio di Ser Anastasio
Vespucci, 1478-1485), fols. 132r-v.
24 See Appendix, document VI, fols. 59 left, 194 right.
25 When brothers acted jointly, as in the case of Domenico and David Ghirlandaio (ASF, Santa Maria
Nuova 5076, fol. 207 left), the accountants stated it quite explicitly.
26 See Appendix, document IV, fol. 308 right. The amount was immediately converted to lire.
27 Home (n. 1), pp. 168-169, discusses the early sources and documents. The provenance is clearly laid
out in Lightbown (n. 21), vol. II, pp. 71-73 (cat. B55), as are the opinions of the previous literature.
See also Marco Ciatti, ed., Ulncoronazione della Vergine del Botticelli: restauro e ricerche, Florence 1990,
for the recent restoration of the painting.

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 160 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece

28 ASF, Compagnie religiose soppresse dal governo francese (hereafter CRS) 103 (San Marco), 85
(Repertorio di obblighi di messe). Originally published and discussed by Jacques Mesnil, Quelques docu
ments sur Botticelli, in: Miscellanea d'arte, I, 1903, pp. 88-91. See also Home (n. 1), p. 356 (doc.
XXXIII).
29 ASF, Arte della Seta 1 (Statuti, 1335-1578), fol. 305v. First published in Home (n. 1), p. 356 (doc.
XXXIV).
30 Mesnil (n. 28), p. 91.
31 Home (n. 1), p. 169.
32 Lightbown (n. 21), vol. II, p. 73.
33 See Appendix, document I, fol. 103r.
34 See Appendix, document II, fol. 23v. The masses are again renewed in 1524 and 1535, see Appendix,
document II, fol. 76r.
35 See Appendix, document I, fol. 103r; and Appendix, document II, fol. 23v.
36 See Covi (n. 23), p. 616, for late patrons. In the case of artists being paid early, among others,
Leonardo was paid for work on the unfinished Adoration of the Magi for San Donato (see Luca Beltrami,
Documenti e memorie riguardanti la vita e le opere di Leonardo da Vinci in ordine cronol?gico, Milan
1919, pp. 8-9), and Cosimo Rosselli was paid for work in the Cappella del Miracolo in Sant'Ambrogio
before the completion of that project (ASF, CRS, 79, 57, fols. 102 left and 125 left).
37 Rosselli, having painted the Chapel of the Miracle and other items for the nuns at Sant'Ambrogio in
1484-1485, drew on the 160 florins he earned for the rest of his life. Cosimo even converted one
hundred florins of his credit into a lifetime supply of grain, wood, and oil. See ASF, CRS, 79
(Sant'Ambrogio), 57 (Debitori e creditor!, 1481-1488), fols. 102 left and right, 125 left and right, and
168 left and right, for the initial agreements and payments. For the Chapel of the Miracle in
Sant'Ambrogio, see Eve Borsook, Cults and imagery at Sant'Ambrogio in Florence, in: Flor. Mitt., XXV,
1981, pp. 147-202.
38 See Appendix, document IV, fol. 308 right.
39 This is the altarpiece now in Berlin (Lightbown [n. 21], vol. II, cat. B42). Giovanni de' Bardi paid 75
florins for the painting, 35 of which were specifically allocated to Botticelli "per suo pennello". For
the documents, see Igino Benvenuto Supino, Botticelli, Florence 1900, p. 83 note. See also Andrew C.
Blume, Giovanni de' Bardi and Botticelli in Santo Spirito, forthcoming.
40 Home (n. 1), p. 355 (docs. XXXI and XXXII); Alison Luchs, Cestello. A Cistercian church of the
Florentine Renaissance, diss. Baltimore 1975, New York/London 1977, pp. 80-82, 161 (note 19).
41 See Appendix, document VI, fol. 59 right.
42 Home (n. 1), p. 357 (doc. XXXVII).
43 See Appendix, document IV, fol. 308 right (25 fiorini larghi di grossi on October 6, 1492) and Appen
dix, document VI, fol. 59 right (10 fiorini larghi di grossi on May 17, 1493).
44 ASF, Catasto 1006 (1480: Santa Croce, Ruote), fols. 252r-v; and ASF, Decima Repubblicana, 15 (1498:
Santa Croce, Ruote), fols. 300-301.
45 Ricci (n. 14), p. 478. Further information on Ricci's personal holdings and finances can be found in
ASF, CRS, 98 (Santa Maria a Monticelli), 54 (Debitori e creditor!, 1494-1497), fols. 69 left and right;
and ASF, San Pietro a Monticelli, 81 (Debitori e creditori, 1492-1523), fols. 9, 11, 175, 176.
46 Ricci (n. 14), p. 478: "Dette pri(n)cipio in circa a questo tempo ad un piccol' bancherottolo, che
seguitato poi ai suoi descendenti con miglior fortuna fu il primo banco di Firenze, del quale lungamente
parleremo sotto il 1594 a Vincenzio suo ?ip?te [p. 578]."
47 ASF, San Pietro a Monticelli, 81 (Debitori e creditori, 1492-1523), fol. 175 left and right. In 1498
this site was bought, with Ricci's- help, by San Piero a Monticelli for 801 fiorini larghi.
48 Ricci (n. 14), pp. 479-481.
49 See Lightbown (n. 21), vol. II.
50 Ricci (n. 14), pp. 478-483. The family archive is, today, no longer traceable.
51 Home (n. 1), p. 358, doc. XL.
52 See ASF, Catasto, 814 (1458: Santa Maria Novella, Unicorno), fol. 343r-v and ASF, Catasto, 918
(1469: Santa Maria Novella, Unicorno), fols. 93r-94r. These documents were originally published by
Home (n. 1), pp. 345 (doc. VII) and 350 (doc. XX).
53 This situation is confirmed by the 1498 tax returns of Botticelli's nephews, Benincasa and Lorenzo,
who declare as their own the property recorded in the 1480 Catasto as belonging to Mariano di Vanni.
See ASF, Catasto, 1010, fols. 244r-245r (Home [n. 1], pp. 350-351) and ASF,: Decima repubblicana,
20, fol. 178r (Home [n. 1], p. 360).
54 On brothers and inheritance see C. Fumagalli, II diritto di fraternita nella giurisprudenza da Accursio
alia codificazione, Turin 1912, and especially Francis William Kent, Household and lineage in Renais

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece 161

sanee Florence. The family life of the Capponi, Ginori, and Rucellai, Princeton 1977. Furthermore
there also are several 14th-century treatises on the subject of De duobus fratribus by Bartolo da
Sassoferrato and Baldo degli Ubaldi. I am grateful to Margaret Haines, who discusses the question of
brothers in her Giuliano da Maiano capofamiglia e imprenditore (presented at the Giuliano da Maiano
conference in Fiesole in 1991, and which will be published shortly), for drawing my attention to this
material.
55 Although I have looked through the protocols of Ser Antonio Vespucci (ASF, Notarile antecosimiano
21065-21075), neither the will of Mariano di Vanni nor that of Giovanni di Mariano is traced. Such
a will might provide an answer to this question, as it does for the della Robbia family. Robert Mode,
Della Robbia. Testamentary case studies, in: Verrocchio and Late Quattrocento Italian sculpture, con
ferences Provo, Utah 1988 and Florence 1989, acts ed. by Steven Buk et al., Florence 1992, p. 360,
has shown that Luca della Robbia's 1470 will explicitly states that all of his property should pass to
his nephew Simone alone as Andrea would have a secure income from the family business.
56 ASF, Santa Maria Nuova, 5638 (Libro di deposit!, 1495-1506), fols. 266 left and right. He deposited
a further 289 florins in 1513, which he never touched. These various transactions are published, sepa
rated from one another and in partial transcriptions, in Beltrami (n. 36).
57 ASF, Santa Maria Nuova, 5639-5641, passim. The deposits amounted to 11 252 florins, of which 9065
represented real savings. I am grateful to Rab Hatfield for sharing this information with me. Professor
Hatfield will shortly be publishing a study of these accounts.
58 Goldthwaite (n. 11), p. 389.
59 Ibidem, p. 348.
60 Ibidem, p. 349.

DOCUMENTARY APPENDIX

Original spelling has been retained, abbreviations have been spelled out, capitalization and punctuation have been
modernized.

Document I. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana (hereafter BMLF), San Marco, 902 (Ricordanze 1443-1493).
fol. 103r: Ricordo come per insino nel'anno 1492 e consoli del'Arte di Por Santa Maria diliber(ar)ono che
la ditta arte dovessi pagare lire quaranta l'ano a' frati et convento di Santo Marco per insino all(a) soma
di 5 anni, e detti frati sieno tenuti di fare uno uficio di morti, et tutto appare nel loro libro degli statuti,
c. 305, e di questo ne fu causa Carlo Gondi.
Deinde detto Carlo disse al nostro sagrestano che quando lui fu de' consoli detta arte aveva prolunghato
questo tempo altri 5 v(e)l 10 anni.
Anno paghato adi 6 d'ottobre 1491 lire quaranta per ditto legato ?ssi fatto detto ufficio; a entrata borsaria,
c. 188. lire 40 -
- E a dl x di magio 1492 li
- E a dl xxi d'ottobre 1493
Gregorio chonverso, a en
Al libro debitori segnato

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 162 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece

Document IL BMLF, San Marco, 903 (Ricordanze 1493-ca. 1550)

fol. 23v: MDIII. Richordo come adi xiiii del mese di dicembre, cio? adi xiiii 1503, essendo io fra Ruberto
d'Antonio da Ghagliano sindaco del convento, pi? volte per commessione et volunta del priore et padri del
convento andato pi? volte all'Arte di Porta Sancta Maria a supplicare a' consoli che una provisione che
fu facta gi? a decta arte pe' consoli che alhora erono et conservatori del'Arte et consiglio insino l'anno
1492 per anni cinque alora proximi da dovere durare, per uficiare la chappella di Sancto Alo et fare uno
officio di morti a decta cappella pro pluribus, che F Arte decta ci dovessi pagare ogni anno lire quaranta
piccioli per elemosina durante decti cinque anni, et dipoi trovandosi de' consoli Charlo Ghondi, fu prorogata
decta provisione et di nuovo ordinato che per altri dieci anni dovessino havere dicte lire xl per ciascuno
anno, et fu d'intentione di loro che etiam finito decto tempo si rifermassi per altri x anni et cos? succes
sive andassi in perpetuo. Che pi? volte havendo loro exposto et narr ato tucto Fordine delle cose et trovato
riscontro al loro libro di statuti di decta Arte a c. 105 [sic], et a libro de' venti sensali, et apare alle
nostre ricordanze segnate A, c. 103. Et inteso da molti che a quelli tempi si erano ritrovati ale sopradecte
chose chosi essere la verit?, decto di si raghunorono e decti consoli et il consiglio di decta Arte et infra
loro obtenuto el partito, fermorono che finito el tempo de' sopradecti anni xv, iterum per altri anni dieci
poi futuri el convento nostro debbi ricevere ogni anno durante decti x anni lire quaranta piccioli per le
sopradecte ragioni.
A libro debitori et creditor i segnato C, c. 16.

Document III. Florence, Archivio di S tato (hereafter ASF), Santa Maria Nuova, 4522 (Entrata C, 1492-1497)

fol. 4v: (Mercholedi a di xiii di febraio 1492). Da Sandro di Mariano di Vanni dipintore fiorini dieci d'oro
in oro e lire sesanta di grossi, rech? e' detto contanti, a libro azuro segnato C, a c. 59
fiorini 10, lire 63, soldi -, danari -

fol. 12r: (Venerdi a di xvii di maggio 1493). D'Allesandro di Mariano di Nanni [sic] detto Botticello dipintore
fiorini dieci larghi di grossi per lui da Ruberto di Giovanni de' Ricci e compagni banchieri, rech? Francesco di
Giovanni di Filippo contanti, a libro azzuro C, c. 59 fiorini -, lire 58, soldi 5, danari 4
fol. 48r: (Martedi a di x di g(i)ugnio 1494). D'Allesandro di Mariano Filipetri, dipintore, fiorini uno d'oro
in oro, rech? e' detto contanti, a libro azuro C, c. 59 fiorini 1, lire -
fol. 49r: (Sabato a di xxi di gugnio 1494). D'Allesandro di Mariano di Vanni lire due, soldi vii? piccioli, rech?
e' detto contanti per resto di Io poderuzo chonperato da noi pi? di fa a llinia, a libro azuro C, c. 59
fiorini -, lire 2, soldi 9, danari -

Document IV. ASF, Santa Maria Nuova, 5078 (Quademo di Cassa, 1492-1496).
fol. 308 left: Alesandro di Mariano di Vanni chontrasc(r)itto de' dare fiorini xl larghi d'oro in oro e lire
cccc0 xxxiiii di grossi, messi a entrata B, a c. 291 fiorini 40, lire 434, soldi -, danari -
fol. 308 right: Alesandro di Mariano di Vani, dipintore altrimenti di Alesandro Boticelo, de' av?re a di 20
di luglio 1492, fiorini quaranta d'oro larghi in oro, rech? lui deto chontanti fiorini 40 -
- E a di 6 d'otobre 1492 fiorini venti cinque larghi di grosi per lui da Ruberto di Giovani de' Rici e
chonpagni banchieri, rech? Francesco di Giovanni di Filipo nostro, lire 138, soldi 15, piccioli di grosi, a
soldi 6, danari 3 Fu?o fiorini -, lire 138, soldi 15 -
A a di 8 di novembre 1492 fiorini cinqua(n)ta tre e soldi quatro larghi di grosi, per lui da Bartolelo di
Francesco Bartolelli, kamarlingo del'Arte di Porta Santa Mar?a, rech? frate Francesco, kamarlingo di Santa
Mar?a Nuova, chontanti fiorini -, lire 295, soldi 5 -
fiorini 40, lire 434

Document V. ASF, Santa Maria Nuova, 5877 (Libro Maestro, 1485-1494)

fol. 471 left: Alesandro di Mariano di Vani di contro de' dare fiorini cxxi, soldi xvi, danar
entrata posto debi avere a libro azzuro segnato C, c. 59 fiorini 121, sold
Fessi charta del sopradetto podere a di 19 d'aprile 1494, roghato ser Giovanni di Marcho d
modo e forma apare a uno richordo a libro B, c. 484

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece 163

fol. 471 right: Alexandre di Mariano di Vanni, dipintore, altrimenti detto Alexandro Boticiello, de' av?re
a dl 29 di dicienbre 1492 fiorini xl larghi d'oro in oro e lire exxxiiii di grossi e soldi 6, danari 8 in oro,
posto debitore al quaderno di cassa secondo B, a c. 308, a entrata B, a c. 291, cassa in questo a c. 464,
ragionati a buon chonto fiorini exxi, soldi 16, danari 8 larghi di Grossi. Al giornale a c. 489, v'? uno
richordo di beni venduti per fiorini 155 larghi di grossi. fiorini 121, soldi 16, danari 8
fol. 464 left'. Chonto di chassa di danari contanti di questo spedale ...
- E a di detto (29 d?cembre 1492) fiorini xl larghi in oro e lire 434 di grossi d'Alexandro dipintore, a
entrata a c. 291 e in questo a c. 471 fiorini 121, soldi 16, danari 8
Document VI. ASF, Santa Maria Nuova, 5878 (Libro Maestro, 1492-1496)
fol. 59 left: Alesandro di Mariano di Vanni Vilipetri [sic] dipintore chontra scritto de' dare in di xviiii
d'aprile 1494, fiorini ciento cinquantacinque larghi netti, sono per un podere posto nel pop?lo di San
Sipolch(r)o fuori della porta a San Friano, chon chasa per signore e terra lavoratia, vingnata, ulivata e
fruttata, cho' sua vochaboli e chonfini, vendutoli a livello et vita di lui et di sua nipoti et disciendenti
per linia maschulina e debaci dare durante la detta linia un paio di chapponi chaschun anno del mese
d'aghosto. El quale debba richonduciere durante la detta linia ogni 29 anni e ogni volta che fa la detta
richognizione oltre al detto ulivello [sic] debe paghare al nostro Spedale lire una piccioli, e i detti non
possono alienare n? a lungho tempo allocchare sanza spressa licenzia dello spedalincho che pe' tempi sar?
di detto spedale. E se manchassino per 3 anni chontinovi che non pachassino detto livello o veramente e
detti beni o alchuni d'esse alienassono o a luncho tempo alochassino, allora e in detto chaso chagino dalle
loro ragioni, e i detti beni chon ogni loro migl(i)oramento ritornino al nostro spedale. Et manchando la
detta linia maschulina e detti beni ritornino al detto spedale, e ch?me pi? a pieno apare per mano di ser
Giovanni di Marcho da Romena sotto sopradetto di. Posto possessioni vendute libere avere in questo c.
194.
fiorini 155, lire -, soldi -
fol. 59 right: (LXVIIII) Alessando di Mariano di Nanni [sic] dipintore de' avere insino a di xi di febraio 1492
fiorini dieci larghi d'oro in oro e lire sessanta di grossi, rech? e' detto chontanti, a entrata C, c. 4
fiorini 21, soldi 13 -
- E a di xvii di magio 1493 fiorini dieci larghi di grossi, per lui da Giovanni di Ruberto de' Ricci e
compagni banchieri, rech? Francesco Franzesi, a entrata C, c. 12 fiorini 10, soldi -, danari -
- E de' avere fiorini centoventuno, soldi xvi, danari viii larghi di grossi per tanti era chreditore al libro
verde segnato B, c. 471 fiorini 121, soldi 16, danari 8 larghi
- E a di x di giugno 1494 fiorini uno largho d'oro in oro, rech? e' detto chontanti, a entrata segnata C, c. 48
fiorini 1, soldi 1, danari 4
- E a di xxi di giugno lire due, soldi viiii piccioli, rech? e' detto per resto d'un poderuzo chomper? da
noi pi? tempo fa a linia maschulina; a entrata segnata C, c. 49 fiorini -, soldi 9, danari -
fiorini 155.0.0
fol. 194 right: Possessioni vendute libere ...
E deono avere in di xviiii d'aprile 1494 fiorini ciento cinquantacinque larghi netti, posto Alesandro di
Mariano di Nanni [sic] Filipetri dipintore debi dare in questo c. 59, sono per un podere posto nel pop?lo
di San Sipolchro fuora della porta a San Friano chon chasa da signore e terra lavoratia, vingniata, ulivata
e fruttata, cho' sua vochaboli e chonfini, vendutali a livello e a vita di lui e di sua nipoti e disciendenti
e per linia maschulina e debonci dare durante la detta linia un paio di chapponi del mese d'aghosto, e pi?
altre chondizioni ch?me pi? a pieno apare per mano di Ser Giovanni da Romena sotto di sopradetto
fiorini 155, lire -, soldi -, danari -

Document VII. ASF, Notarile antecosimiano, 21065 (Ser Antonio di Anastasio Vespucci, 1441-1525).
fol 650r: MCCCLXXXX, indictione VIII, die XXVII septembris
Item postea, dictis anno, indictione et die. Actum in Arte Cambii civitatis Florentie, presentibus testibus
Iohanne Iacopi, domicello Artis Cambii, Francisco Nicholai della Scharperia, habitante in populo Sancti
[illegible] de Florentia.

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 164 A.C. Blume / Botticelli's finances and the S. Marco altarpiece

Cum hoc sit quod Beninchasa et Amideus, fratres et filii Iohannis Mariani Vannis Filippepi de Florentia,
tractaverint promictere Alexandro, eorum patruo et olim filio dicti Mariani Vannis, per se vel alium seu
alios, directe vel indirecte, de iure vel de facto, non molestare nee modo aliquo inquietare ipsum Alexandrum
personaliter vel in bonis eius presentibus vel futuris seu que per eum ad presens possidentur vel in futurum
possidebuntur quacumque de causa vel titulo durante tarnen vita ipsius Alexandri, ac etiam se facturos et
curaturos ita et taliter et cum effectu, omni iuris et facti exceptione et gavillatione remota, quod durante
vita dictis Alexandri eorum patrui predict!, ipse Alexander personaliter aut in bonis eius, presentibus vel
futuris et ad eum modo alique pertinentibus et spectantibus et seu que in futurum ad eum pertinebunt vel
spectabunt seu per eum quacumque de causa, modo vel forma possidentur vel in futurum possidebuntur,
occaxione et pretextu dotis domine Nere, matris dictorum Beninchase et Amidei et uxoris ad presens
Iohannis, patris dictorum Beninchase et Amidei, constante matrimonio vel soluto, vel occaxione alicuius
debiti hactenus initi et contract! vel in futurum quomodolibet et quacumque de causa contrahendi per dictum
lohannem, patrem dictorum Beninchase et Amidei, sive etiam per dictum quondam Marianum, non
molest abunt nee modo aliquo in iudicio vel extra, directe vel indirecte, inquiet abunt, alias conservare ipsum
Alexandrum indepnem et penitus sine danno ab huiusmodi molestia lite vel controversia, et si qua forte lis,
causa, questio, controversia aut aliqua eidem Alexandro personaliter vel in bonis predictis, durante tarnen
vita dicti Alexandri et non ulterius, modo aliquo, de iure vel de facto, in indicis sive extra, ex causis et
occaxionibus predictis vel altera earum.
fol 650v: vel ab eis dependentibus, fieret, inferretur vel moveretur, ipsam huiusmodi litem, questionem,
controversiam et molestiam infra octo dies proxime futuros post notificationem factam, in se suscipere et
ipsum Alexandrum indepnem et penitus sine danno conservare a predictis. Sed quod ipsum Alexandrum et
eius bona predicta a debitis predictis et quolibet eorum indepnem. et penitus sine danno conservabunt et
quilibet eorum in solidum et in totum conservabit.
Hinc est quod dictus lohannes olim Mariani Vannis Filippepi, civis florentinus, pater dictorum Beninchase
et Amidei, cit(r)a revocationem etc., omni modo etc., fecit etc. suum procuratorem Bernardum olim Neri
Andr?e Neri de Florentia, librarium, absentem, etc., specialiter et expresse ad consentiendum et auctoran
dum et consensum et licentiam dandum et concedendum dictis Beninchase et Amideo, eius filiis predictis,
et cuilibet eorum, in et super quocumque instrumento, contractu, promissione vel obligatione propterea et
de predictis fiendis et celebrandis per dictos Beninchasam et Amideum cum Alexandro eorum patruo
predicto. Et ad faciendum, procurandum et exercendum in predictis et circa predicta necessaria, consueta
et oportuna er prout et sicut dicto procurator! videbitur et placebit. Et generaliter etc. Dans etc.

Document VIII. ASF, Notarile antecosimiano, 21071 (Ser Antonio di Ser Nastagio Vespucci, 1490-1492)
fol 179r: MCCCCLXXXXII. In margin: Locatio ad affictum pro Iohanne et Alexandro Botticelli.
Item postea dictis anno indictione et die xii mensis aprilis. Actum in Arte Cambii civitatis Florentie,
presentibus testibus etc. Sesio(?) Matte! Buonaguisi et Johanne Iacobi domicello dicte Artis Cambii.
Nicholaus olim Simonis magistri Luce, setaiuolus populi Sancti Felicis in Platea de Florentia, conductor
infrascriptorum bonorum ab hospitale S?nete Marie Nove de Florentia, cum auetoritate alteri locandi ut
asseruit dictus Nicholaus etc., omni modo etc. locavit ad affictum etc. Iohanni et Alexandro fratribus
carnalibus et olim filiis Mariani Vannis Filipepi populi S?nete Lucie Omnium Sanctorum de Florentia,
presentibus et conducentibus pro se et eorum uxoribus presentibus et futuris, unum poderectum cum domo
pro domino, cum palcis, salis, cameris, volta, columbaris, terreno et aliis suis habituris et edificiis et terris
laboratiis, vineatis et fructatis, positis in populo Sancti Sepulchri, loco dicto al Sepolchro, prope Florentiam,
staiorum ... [sic], quibus omnibus a i? via, a ii? Pier Filippi Pandolfini, a iii? illorum del Chavaliere
chalzaiuoli, a iiii? ecclesia Montis Olivet!, infra predictos confines etc., ad habendum etc., pro tempore
annorum trium initi?torum die prima mensis novembris proxime preterit! anni 1491 et finiendorum ut
sequitur, et pro affictu quod ipsum primum annum florenorum novem auri largorum de grossis, solvendorum
per totum mensem mari proxime futur! presentis et quoad alios duos annos sequentes librarum xliiii
parvorum, solvendorum de sex mensibus in sex menses. Qui locator etc. promisit etc. dictum predium
alteri non locare etc. possessionem [one word illegible] etc. Et qui conductores etc. promlserunt etc. [one
word illegible] in solidum etc. bene tenere et uti etc. pro alio non confiteri etc. affictum persolvere etc.
et in fine t empor is relaps are etc. Que omnia etc. promiserunt etc. observare etc. sub pena florenorum
centum auri largorum etc. Que pena etc., qua pena etc., sub infrascriptis etc., pro quibus omnibus etc.
obligaverunt etc., renuntiaverunt etc., guarentigia etc. Rogantes etc.

Photo Credit: Alinari, Florence.

This content downloaded from 151.41.160.218 on Fri, 08 May 2020 18:59:36 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms