The Palazzo Moro Lin in the San Marco sestiere of Venice, Italy, also known as the “Palazzo delle Tredici Finestre” (Palace of 13 Windows), is a striking Baroque palace situated along the Grand Canal. Located between the Palazzo Grassi and the Palazzo da Lezze, it is a significant example of 17th-century Venetian architecture, reflecting the wealth, artistic patronage, and social ambition of its original owners. Commissioned around 1670 by the painter Pietro Liberi and later associated with the Moro Lin family, the palace is renowned for its monumental facade, eclectic history, and cultural contributions.
The Palazzo Moro Lin was constructed around 1670 for Pietro Liberi
(1605–1687), a celebrated Venetian painter, knight of San Marco, and
colorful figure whose life included adventures as a condottiere,
captivity by Barbary pirates, and artistic training under Alessandro
Varotari (Padovanino). Liberi, often called “Il Libertino” for his
libertine lifestyle, commissioned the palace to consolidate six
pre-existing houses into a single grand residence, a project that
showcased his wealth and status. The architect, Sebastiano Mazzoni (c.
1611–1678), a Florentine painter and architect active in Venice,
designed the building, blending Baroque exuberance with classical
restraint inspired by Jacopo Sansovino.
After Liberi’s death in
1687, the palace was acquired in 1691 by Antonio Lin, a wealthy merchant
from Bergamo who had purchased his way into the Venetian patriciate in
1686 for 100,000 ducats, a common practice during the Republic’s
financial strains. The marriage of Gaspare Moro and Isabella Lin in 1685
united the Moro and Lin families, giving the palace its current name,
“Moro Lin.” The Moro family, of ancient Venetian origin, and the Lin
family, newly ennobled, enriched the palace with frescoes and structural
modifications, including the addition of a third floor in the early 18th
century, which altered its original proportions.
In the 19th
century, the palace became a hub for artistic activity, housing painters
like Francesco Hayez (1791–1882), a leading Romantic artist, and
Ludovico Lipparini, a follower of Hayez’s school. Hayez, who lived there
while studying at the Accademia del Farsetti, contributed to Venice’s
artistic revival. By 1942, the palace was purchased by Enrico Ghezzi, a
Milanese industrialist, from the Pascolato family. Today, it serves as a
private condominium, divided into apartments, a common fate for Venice’s
historic palaces as the city balances preservation with modern use.
The palace’s history reflects Venice’s social dynamics, where
artistic patronage, mercantile wealth, and strategic marriages shaped
the patrician class. Its association with Liberi, the Moro Lin family,
and later artists underscores its role as a cultural landmark in the San
Marco sestiere, the political and cultural heart of the Venetian
Republic.
The Palazzo Moro Lin is a quintessential Venetian Baroque palace,
notable for its massive facade constructed entirely of Istrian stone, a
durable, luminous material that reflects the Grand Canal’s light.
Designed by Sebastiano Mazzoni, the palace’s architecture merges six
distinct structures into a unified whole, a feat that required
innovative engineering to address the irregular site and lagoon
foundations. The facade’s restrained classicism, evoking Sansovino’s
Fabbriche Nuove, contrasts with the more ornate Baroque designs of
contemporaries like Baldassarre Longhena, making it a unique
transitional work.
Facade
The Grand Canal facade is the
palace’s defining feature, organized across four levels with a
symmetrical yet dynamic composition:
Ground Floor (Pé Pian): The
base features a portego with seven round-arched openings emerging
directly from the canal, designed for gondola access and goods delivery.
The central arch is slightly smaller, creating a subtle hierarchy, while
the lateral arches are supported by rusticated stonework. Pilasters with
Ionic and Doric capitals punctuate the arches, adding classical
refinement. The rustication conveys solidity, aligning with the palace’s
role as a status symbol.
First Piano Nobile: The principal floor,
used for reception and living spaces, is marked by 13 rectangular
monofore (single windows) inscribed within arched recesses, a design
that blends Baroque clarity with Venetian Gothic echoes. A continuous
marble balustrade spans the facade, enhancing elegance and visual unity.
Pilasters separate each window, creating a rhythmic pattern, while
metopes, triglifs, and capitals introduce Renaissance motifs. A large
central window, aligned with the ground-floor arch, serves as a focal
point, though its placement over paired lateral windows introduces an
unconventional asymmetry.
Second Piano Nobile: This floor mirrors the
first, with 13 monofore in arched recesses, maintaining the “13 windows”
motif that gives the palace its nickname. The windows are simpler but
retain the pilastered rhythm, ensuring continuity.
Third Floor: Added
in the early 18th century by the Lin family, this floor features 13
rectangular windows without arched recesses, topped by a dentilled
cornice. The addition elongates the facade, making it appear lower and
less proportionate, a modification criticized for diluting the original
design’s eccentric character. The cornice, with its classical detailing,
provides a formal conclusion to the facade.
The facade’s bugnato
(rusticated stonework) is interrupted by the arched windows and
pilasters, creating a dynamic interplay of light and shadow. The use of
classical elements, such as entablatures and capitals, reflects
Mazzoni’s Florentine training, but the overall effect is considered
somewhat conservative for the late 17th century, as Venetian
architecture was beginning to embrace the more fluid forms of Francesco
Borromini. The palace’s scale and symmetry make it a commanding presence
on the Grand Canal, rivaling nearby palaces like Palazzo Grassi.
Interior
The interior of the Palazzo Moro Lin was once a showcase of
Baroque opulence, though its division into apartments has fragmented the
original layout. Historical records describe a central salon as the
heart of the palace, used for receptions and cultural events. Key
interior features include:
Frescoes: The palace was originally
decorated by prominent Venetian painters, including Antonio Bellucci,
Antonio Molinari, and Gregorio Lazzarini. Four frescoes by Lazzarini,
depicting the liberal arts, survive above the entrance atrium’s door,
though they are damaged by salt corrosion from Venice’s humid
environment. In 1806, Carlo Bevilacqua painted a significant ceiling in
the central salon, depicting allegories of Glory and Fame, which remains
a highlight of the preserved interiors. Additional works by Pietro Moro,
Luca Carlevaris, Simonini, and Celini, including landscapes and marine
scenes, once adorned smaller rooms but were largely lost when the salon
was subdivided.
Architectural Details: The interior retains stucco
figurations and columns embedded in walls, remnants of the original
salon’s grandeur. The portego, a wide central hall typical of Venetian
palaces, served as a circulatory spine, connecting the canal entrance to
the rear rooms. The palace also housed Liberi’s collection of ancient
medals, which inspired his historical paintings, such as those for the
Sala dello Scrutinio in the Doge’s Palace.
Current State: As a
condominium, the interior varies in preservation, with some apartments
retaining historical elements like exposed beams, stucco, or flooring,
while others have been modernized. The central salon’s ceiling and
Lazzarini’s frescoes are the most significant surviving features, though
access is restricted to residents or special tours.
The interior’s
partial loss reflects the challenges of maintaining Venice’s historic
buildings, where environmental factors like humidity and salt corrosion,
combined with adaptive reuse, threaten delicate artworks.
Structural Considerations
The palace’s construction on Venice’s
lagoon required wooden pilings driven into the muddy substrate, a
standard Venetian technique. Uniting six houses into a single structure
posed engineering challenges, particularly in aligning foundations and
ensuring structural stability. Mazzoni’s design skillfully masks the
irregularities of the site, creating a unified facade that appears
purpose-built. The use of Istrian stone ensures durability against the
canal’s erosive effects, though ongoing maintenance is necessary to
combat acqua alta (high tide flooding).
The Palazzo Moro Lin is a cultural and historical landmark that
encapsulates Venice’s 17th- and 18th-century social, artistic, and
architectural dynamics. Its significance lies in several key areas:
Artistic Patronage: Pietro Liberi’s commission reflects the role of
artists as patrons in Venice, a city where painters like Titian and
Tintoretto wielded significant influence. Liberi’s adventurous life and
knighthood added a layer of prestige to the palace, while his collection
of medals and paintings enriched its cultural milieu. The palace’s later
association with Francesco Hayez and Ludovico Lipparini ties it to the
Romantic movement, reinforcing Venice’s status as an artistic hub into
the 19th century.
Social Mobility: The Moro Lin family’s ownership
highlights the fluidity of Venice’s patrician class. Antonio Lin’s entry
into the nobility through wealth and marriage exemplifies how mercantile
success could elevate families, while the Moro family’s ancient lineage
anchored the palace in Venetian tradition. The palace’s history thus
mirrors the Republic’s meritocratic yet hierarchical social structure.
Cultural Hub: The palace served as a venue for intellectual and artistic
gatherings, notably under Michelangelo Lin, who hosted musical academies
and pursued eclectic interests like hunting, bullfighting, and balloon
games. These activities underscore the palace’s role as a social and
cultural space, connecting Venice’s elite with broader European trends.
Architectural Transition: The palace bridges Renaissance and Baroque
styles, with its classical facade evoking Sansovino’s clarity and its
scale anticipating the grandeur of later Baroque palaces like Ca’
Pesaro. The 18th-century addition of the third floor, while
controversial, reflects Venice’s evolving architectural tastes and the
practical need to expand living space.
The palace’s location in San
Marco, near the political center of the Doge’s Palace and the cultural
hub of Piazza San Marco, enhances its significance. Its proximity to
Palazzo Grassi, now a contemporary art museum, and Ca’ Rezzonico, a
Baroque museum, situates it within a rich architectural and cultural
context, illustrating the continuity of Venice’s artistic heritage.
Today, the Palazzo Moro Lin functions as a private condominium, with
its interiors divided into residential apartments. This adaptive reuse
ensures the building’s maintenance but restricts public access, making
it less prominent as a tourist destination compared to museums like Ca’
Pesaro or Ca’ Rezzonico. The facade remains in excellent condition, its
Istrian stone well-preserved despite exposure to the Grand Canal’s
elements. The interior, however, faces challenges from salt corrosion
and humidity, particularly affecting the surviving frescoes by Lazzarini
and Bevilacqua. Restoration efforts, supported by organizations like
Save Venice, have helped stabilize key artworks, but the palace’s
private status limits comprehensive conservation.
The palace is
occasionally opened for cultural events or heritage tours, such as those
organized by Conoscere Venezia or Venice Heritage Days, which may allow
access to the central salon or atrium. For example, guided tours may
highlight Bevilacqua’s ceiling or Lazzarini’s frescoes, offering rare
glimpses of the interior’s historical splendor.
While the Palazzo Moro Lin is not a public museum, its exterior is a
highlight for visitors exploring the Grand Canal. The best ways to
experience the palace include:
Grand Canal View: A vaporetto ride
(Line 2, San Samuele stop) or gondola tour offers unobstructed views of
the facade, particularly at dusk when the Istrian stone reflects the
water’s glow. The “13 windows” create a rhythmic silhouette,
complemented by the balustrade and pilasters.
Landside Approach: From
Campo San Samuele, a short walk from the Palazzo Grassi, visitors can
view the palace’s rear facade, though it is less ornate. The campo’s
quiet charm, with the Chiesa di San Samuele nearby, provides a serene
contrast to the bustling Grand Canal.
Guided Tours: Specialized tours
focusing on Venetian Baroque architecture or the San Marco sestiere,
offered by operators like Context Travel or Venice Tours, may include
the palace’s exterior and, on rare occasions, interior access. Checking
with local cultural organizations for open days is recommended.
Digital Resources: For those unable to visit, platforms like Google Arts
& Culture or virtual Grand Canal tours offer high-resolution images of
the facade, though interior documentation is limited.
No admission
tickets are required to view the exterior, and the palace is accessible
year-round from the canal or nearby streets. Visitors can combine a
visit with nearby attractions, such as Palazzo Grassi (contemporary
art), Ca’ Rezzonico (18th-century Venice museum), or Piazza San Marco
(10-minute walk). The San Samuele vaporetto stop is convenient, and the
palace’s location makes it part of a walkable itinerary through San
Marco’s cultural landmarks.
The Palazzo Moro Lin is a fascinating case study in Venetian Baroque
architecture and social history, but it raises several points for
critical reflection:
Architectural Eccentricity: The facade’s
restrained classicism, evoking Sansovino, contrasts with the more
dynamic Baroque of Longhena’s Ca’ Pesaro. Was Mazzoni’s design a
deliberate nod to Renaissance ideals, reflecting Liberi’s artistic
conservatism, or a compromise due to the challenges of uniting six
structures? The 18th-century third floor, while practical, disrupts the
original proportions, prompting debate about the ethics of altering
historic buildings.
Cultural Role: The palace’s history as a hub for
artists like Liberi, Hayez, and Michelangelo Lin underscores Venice’s
role as a cultural crossroads. However, its current private status
limits its visibility, raising questions about how to integrate such
buildings into the city’s tourism narrative without compromising their
function.
Preservation Challenges: The surviving frescoes,
particularly Lazzarini’s and Bevilacqua’s, are at risk from
environmental factors. The palace’s condominium status complicates
coordinated conservation, highlighting the tension between private
ownership and public heritage in Venice.
Tourism and Accessibility:
Unlike Ca’ Pesaro or Ca’ Rezzonico, the palace’s lack of public access
reduces its cultural impact. Could selective openings, digital
reconstructions, or partnerships with cultural institutions enhance its
prominence while respecting residents’ privacy?
The palace’s story
also reflects Venice’s broader struggle to balance preservation with
modernity. Its transformation from a single-family residence to a
multi-unit condominium mirrors the city’s shift from a patrician
republic to a tourism-driven economy, where historic buildings must
adapt to survive.