INTRODUCTION TO PART II

WHEN I first undertook to write these Lives I did not purpose to make a mere list of the artists with an inventory, so to speak, of their works. I should not consider it a worthy end of all my labours; which, if not distinguished, have certainly been long and tedious, merely to find out their numbers, their names and countries, and to relate in what cities or places their paintings, sculptures or buildings may now be found. This I could have done by a mere table without introducing my own criticisms anywhere. But I have remarked that those historians who are proclaimed by common consent to have written with the best judgment have not been contented with confining themselves to a bare narration of facts, but with all diligence and the utmost curiosity they have investigated the motives, the methods, and the lives of the worthies of old in the manage ment of their affairs, liave taken pains to point out their errors, their fine strokes, their expedients, and the prudent course sometimes taken in the management of affairs, and, in short, all that they have done, wisely or negligently, with prudence, reverence, or generosity. Such are the inethods of those who regard history as the mirror of human life, not merely to write down a dry record of the events which happen to a prince or to a republic, but to set forth the opinions, counsels, decisions and plans of men, the causes which lead to successful or unsuccessful action. This is the trve spirit of a history that really teaches men how to live, and renders them prudent; and this, next to the pleasure derived from seeing things both past and present, is the true end of history. For these reasons I have undertaken to write the history of the finest artists, in order, first, to assist the arts to the utmost of my power, and next, to honour thein, so tliat so far as 1 am able I have adopted this method in imitation of the great historians. Thus I have endeavoured not only to relate what the artists have done, but I have tried to distinguish the good from the better, and the best from the medium work, to note somewhat carefully the methods, manners processes, behaviour and ideas of the painters and sculptors, investigating into the causes and roots of things, and of the improvement and decline of the arts which took place at divers times and in divers persons for the benefit of those who cannot do so for themselves. At the beginning of these Lives I spoke of the nobility and antiquity of these arts, as was suitable at that stage, passing by many things of Pliny and other authors of which I might have made use, if I had not been anxious, perhaps against the ‚judgment of many, to leave everyone free to see for himself the fancies of others in their proper setting. It now appears to me that the present opportunity is a fitting one to do what I could not do then, if I wished to avoid tediousness and length fatal to the attention I desire, namely, to disclose my pur- pose and intention more carefully, and to show to what end I have divided the body of these Lives into three parts. It is very true tliat some excel in the arts by diligence, some by study, some by imitation, and others again by a knowledge of the sciences, which are all useful aids, while some unite all these attributes or the greater number of them; but here I will deal only in generalities, because in the individual Lives I have said enough of the methods, arts, manners, and the causes of good, superior and pre-emlnent workmanship, and I will review the matter generally, considering rather the nature of the times than the persons, whom I have divided into tliree parts, or ages if you will, in order not to push the investigation too far, from the renaissance of the arts until the century in which we live, differing from each other in a very marked manner. Thus in the first and earliest period the three arts are seen to be very far from perfection, and though they possess some amount of excellence, yet this is accompanied by such imperfections that they certainly do not merit extravagant praise. But since they prepared the way aiid formed the style for the better work which followed, it is not possihle to say anything but good of them, and I must give them rather more glory than their works deserve in themselves, and than if it was necessary to judge them by the perfect rules of the art. In the second part there is a manifest improvement both in the inventions and in the execution, with more design, a better style and greater finish, the roughness of the old style being got rid of, and that rudeness and want of proportion which the grossness of the time had brought in its train. But who will venture to say that anyone perfect in everything was found in this period, who produced things equal to the present state of invention, design and colouring? Who lias observed in them the soft shading away of the figures with the dark colouring, the light being left on the prominent parts only, and who has seen there the perforation and fine finishing of the marble statues which are done to-day? This praise certainly belongs alone to the third period, of which I may safely say that art has done everything that is permitted to an imitator of Nature, and that it has risen so high that its decline must now be feared rather than any further progress expected. Turning these things over carefully in my mind, I conclude that it is a property and peculiarity of these arts that from a humble beginning they gradually improve and attain the summit of perfection. I am led to believe this by an observation of the same phenomena in the other liberal arts, and the fact that there is a species of relationship between them is an argument of its truth. The fate of painting and sculpture in the ancient times must have been so similar that with a cliange of names their cases would be exactly alike. It we may credit those who lived near those times, and who were able to see and judge the labours of the ancients, the statues of Canachus were very hard and without any vivacity or movement, and withal considerably removed from the truth; the same is said of those of Calamides, although they were somewhat smoother. Myron followed, and although lie did not precisely imitate the truth of Nature, yet he endowed his works with such excellent proportion and grace that they might, without exaggeration, be termed beautiful. In the tliird degree of succession came Polycletus and the other renowned men who are said to have attained absolute perfection, as we are bound to believe. The same progress, again, must have taken place in painting, because it is said that the works of those who painted in a single colour, and who were called Mono- chromatists, did not attain to a high stage of perfection, and we may readily believe this. In the succeeding works of Zeuxis, Polygnotus, Timanthes, and the rest, who only employed four colours, the lineaments, outlines and forms are unreservedly praised, though doubtless they left something to be desired. But in the productions of Erione, Nicomachus, Protogenes and Apelles everything is so perfect and beautiful that one can conceive nothing better, for they not only painted the form and gestures of the body with the highest excellence, but the emotions and passions in addition. But I pass these by, for we are forced to estimate them by the opinions of others, who frequently do not agree, the very dates being uncertain, although in this matter I have followed the best authors. We now come to our

(1) He Probably means Echion.

own day, in which the eye is a considerably better guide and judge than the ear. To take one subject, is it not manifest what improvements and advances have been made in architecture from the time of Buschetto the Greek to that of Arnolfo the German and of Giotto? The buildings of the day show this, in the cliurches, pilasters, columns, bases, capitals, and all the comices with their formless members, such as those of S. Maria del Fiore at Florence, the incrustation of the exterior of S. Giovanni, 5 Miniato, the Vescovado of Fiesole, the Duomo of Milan, S. Vitale of Ravenna, S. Maria Maggiore at Rome, and the old Duomo outside Arezzo, where, apart from some good reinnants of antique fragments, there is nothing well ordered or executed. But those two men introduced considerable improvements, so that the art made no little progress under them, for they improved the proportions, and not only made the buildings stable and strong, but also in some measure ornate, though to be sure their ornaments were confused and very imperfect, and, if I may say so, not very decorative. For in their columns they did not observe the measurements and proportions required by the art, nor did they distinguish the orders, so that there were not distinctively Doric, Corinthian, Ionic, or Tuscan, but mixed after a rule of their own, which consisted of absence of rule. They made them very thick or very slender, as it happened to suit their purpose. Their invention proceeded in part from their own brains and in part from remnants of antiquity which they had seen. Their plans were partly borrowed from good sources and partly the accretions of their own fancies, so that when the walls were erected they had a different form. Yet anyone who compares these things with those which preceded them will remark an improvement in every particular, and will observe certain things which are somewhat out of favour in our day, such as some small temples of brick covered with stucco at S. Giovanni Lateran at Rome.

I make the same observations with regard to sculpture, which in the first age of its renaissance had some excellencies, for it had shaken off the rude Byzantine style which was so rough that it smacked far more of the quarry than of the talent of the artist, the statues being utterly devoid of folds, pose, or move- ment, and hardly worthy to be called statues. Afterwards, when design had been improved by Giotto, marble and stone figures were also greatly improved by such men as Andrea Pisano, his son Nino, and his other pupils, who were far better than their predecessors. They endowed their statues with more flexibility and set them in considerably improved postures, as did the two Sienese, Agostino and Agnolo, who, as I have said, made the tomb of Guido, bishop of Arezzo, and also those Germans who made the facade of Orvieto. Thus sculpture manifestly made some progress at this time, the figures receiving a better form and a better arrangement of folds and draperies, some of the heads a better carriage, while the attitudes were less stiff, so that, in short, there is a sign of an attempt to reach the good. But nevertheless they fell far short of it, because the art of design was not then very perfect, and there was no great number of good works for them to imitate. Accordingly the masters of that day, whom I have put in the first part, merit praise and esteem for their productions, because it must be remembered that they, as well as the architects and painters of the time, had no assistance from their predecessors, and were obliged to find a way for themselves; and a beginning, however poor, is always worthy of praise by no means poor.

Painting enjoyed little better fortune at this time, except that it was more practised owing to its popularity with the people, so that it had more professors who thus made more evident progress than was perceived in the other two arts. Thus we see that the original Byzantine style was entirely abandoned, at first through the efforts of Cimabue and then by the help of Giotto. From it arose a new style which I like to call Giotto's, because it was introduced by him and his pupils, and was afterwards universally admired and imitated. In this the profile surrounding the whole figure is abandoned, as well as the lustreless eyes, the tip-toed feet, the attenuated hands, the absence of shadow, and all the other Byzantine absurdities, which were replaced by graceful heads and beautiful colouring. Giotto in particular improved the attitudes of the figures, and began to give a measure of vivacity to the heads and folds to the draperies, which made a closer approach to Nature than is seen in the work of his pre- decessors, while he partially discovered the art of foreshortening figures. He also was the first to express the emotions, so that fear, hope, rage and love may be partly recognised. lie rendered his style smooth where it was originally uneven and rugged, and if he did not succeed in giving his eyes the beautiful expres- sion of life, or the right expressions to his weeping figures, or make his hair pretty, his beards downy, his hands knotty and muscular, or his nudes like the reality, he must be excused on account of the difficulty of the art, and because he had not seen any painters better than himself. Amid the general poverty of art and of the time everyone can grasp the excel- lence of his judgment displayed in his works, his observation of expressIon and his ready following of Nature, for his figures naturally perform what they have to do and prove that his judgment, if not perfect, was very good. The same qualities appearcd subsequently in the others, as in the colour- ing of Taddeo Gaddi, which is softer and more forceful, has better flesh tints and better coloured draperies, while the n,ovemcnts of the figures are more powerful. Simon of Siena excelled in the composition of scenes, Stefano Scimmia' and Tommaso introduced great improvements in design, in new ideas in perspectiye, and in shading and harmonising the colours, while adhering steadily to Giotto's style. A like amount of skill and dexterity was exhibited by Spinello of Arezzo, Parri his son, Jacopo di Casentino, Antonio of Venice, Lippi, and Gherardo Starnini, and the other painters who laboured after Giotto, following his expressions, lineaments, colouring and style, making some improvements it is true, but not to such an extent as to make it appear that they wished to introduce another method. Thus anyone who has fo1lowed my argument will see that the three arts were, so to speak, merely sketched up to this point, and that they lacked much of the perfection which belongs to them, and if there had been no improvement to follow, the advances they made would have been of little service, and would not have been worthy of much esteem. I hope that no one will believe me to be so gross or of so little judgment as not to be aware that the things of Giotto, of Andrea Pisano, of Nino, and all the rest, whom I have put together in the first part on account of their resemblance in style, would deserve more than a moderate amount of praise if they were to be compared with the works produced after their time. I was well aware of this when I praised them. But those who take into consideration the nature of their age, the scarcity of artists, the difficulty of obtaining good assistance, will consider them not merely beautiful, a- I have said, but miraculous, and will take infinite pleasure in noticing the first efforts and those sparks of excellence which began to appear in their paintings and sculptures. The victory of L. Marcius in Spain was not of such great importance as many of the triumphs of the Romans, but considering the time, the place, the circumstances, the persons, and the numbers, it was con- sidered stupendous and worthy to this day of the praises which

(1) i.e. the Ape (of Nature), his nickname.

are lavishly bestowed upon it by the historians. For all these reasons I have considered that these artists deserve not only a careful account from me, but all the praise which I have so readily and sincerely bestowed upon them. It seemed to me that it would not bc displeasing to artists to hear these Lives and to examine the methods and styles of those men, and possibly they may draw no small advantage from them. If so, I shall be greatly delighted, and shall consider it a rich reward for this labour, in which it has been my sole object to serve and please them to the extent of my powers.

Having now, if I may say so, taken these three arts from the nurse, and having passed the age of childhood, there follows the second period in which a notable improvement may be Iremarked in everything. The inventions are more lavish with figures, richer in ornaments, design is more firmly grounded and more natural and life-like, while even in the works executed with less skill there is purpose and thought expressed with diligence, the style is lighter, the colours more charming, so that little is wanting of complete perfection, and the truth of Nature is exactly imitated. In the first place, by means of the study and diligence of the great Filippo Brunelleschi, architecture once again discovered the measurements and proportions of the ancients, as well in the round columns as in the square pilasters and in the rough and the polished corners; order is distinguished from order, the difference between them being made apparent, matters are arranged to proceed according to rule with more Iorder, things are partitioned out by measure, design shows increased power and method, gracefulness pervades every- thing and exhibits the excellence of the art, the beauty and variety of capitals and cornices are rediscovered, so that the plans of churches and other buildings are well conceived, the buildings themselves being ornate, magnificent and in pro- portion. An example is afforded by the stupendous cupola of S. Maria del Fiore at Florence, in the beauty and grace of its lantern, in the varied and gracefully decorated church of S. Spirito, in the no less beautiful S. Lorenzo, in the curious inven- tion of the octagonal church of the Angioli, in the airy church and convent of the abbey at Fiesole, and in the magnificent and grandiose commencement of the palace of the Fitti, not to speak of the convenient and commodious erection due to Fran- cesco di Giorgio of the palace and church of the Duomo of Urbino, the rich and powerful castle of Naples, the impregnable

(1) The architect was Luciano di Laurana, not Francesco di Giorgio.

castle of Milan, and many other notable buildings of that time. These works may safely be called beautiful and good, although they do not yet possess that finesse and a certain exqilisite grace and finish of the cornices, with delicate and liglit methods of marking leaves, and in making the extremities of foliage, and other perfections whicli caine afterwards, as will be seen in thc third part, which will contain those wIio surpassed the other architects of old in perfection, grace, finish, fertility and dexterity. I cannot call it perfect at this stage, although certainly beautiful and good, because improvements were afterwards made in it; so I think I may reasonably assert that sometliing was still lacking. Certainly there were some things truly miraculous which have not been excelled even in our own day, and perhaps never will be; such, for example, as the lanteri, of the cupola of Maria del Fiore, and the cupola itself as regards its size, wliere Filippo not only dared to equal the ancients in the body of the building, but to surpass them in the height of the walls. Nevertheless, as we are dealing in generalities, the perfection and excellence of a single thing must not be advanced to prove the excellence of all. The same applies to painting and to sculpture also, in which we may see to-day works of rare excellence by masters of this second period, such as those of Masaccio in the Carmine, who painted a naked man shivering with cold, and produced other vigorous and spirited works, but as a general rule they did not attain to the state of perfection of the third age, of which I shall speak when the time comes. Here I must confine myself to the men of the second period. To speak in the first place of the sculptors who made such great advances on the early style that they left little for the third period to complete. They introduced so much more grace, nature, order, design and propnrtion into their works that their statues begin to appear almost like living persons and not mere statues as the first ones were. This is shown in the works produced during the renovation of the style, as will be seen in the second part, where the figures of Jacopo dalla Quercia of Siena possess more movement, grace, design and diligence, those of Filippo a better knowledge of the muscles, better proportlons and more judgment, and those of their pupils exhibit the same qualities. But Lorenzo Ghiberti added yet more in his production of the doors of S. Giovanni, in which he displayed his invention, order, style and design so that his figures seem to move and l>reathe. Although Donato lived at the same time, I was uncertain whether I ought not to place him in the third period, since his works are up to the level of the good antiques; placed in the second period, I may call him the standard of the others, because he combined in his person all the qualities which were distributed ainong many others, for he iinparted to his figures a movement, life and reality whicli make them wortliy to rank with modern works, and even witli tliosc of antiquity, as I have said.

At this time also painting made equal advances, and in this art Masaccio entirely freed liimself from Giotto's style, his heads, draperies, buildings, nudes, colouring and foresliortening being in a new maiiner, introducing that modern style which has been adopted by all our artists from that tinie to oiir own day, embel- lished and enriched from time to time with additional graces, invention and ornaments. This will be seen when we are dealing with the separate Lives, where we shall meet with a new method of colouring, of foreshortening, natural attitudes, a much better expression of the emotions of the spirit and of the gestures of the body, joined to a constant endeavour to get nearer to the truth of Nature in design, while the faces are exactly like those of men as they were seen and known by the artists. Thus they sought to reproduce what they saw in Nature and no more, and thus they came to consider more closely and understand more fully. This encouraged them to make rules for perspective, and to get their foreshortening in the exact form of natural reljef, proceeding to the observation of shadows and lights, shading and other difficulties, composing their scenes with greater regard for probability, attempting to make their landscapes more like reality, as well as the trees, grass, flowers, air, clouds and other natural phenomena, so that it may be said without fear of contradiction that the arts are not only improved, but have reached the flower of their youth, giving promise of fruit in the future, that they would soon attain to their age of perfection.

And now with God's help I shall begin the Life of Jacopo dalla Quercia of Siena, to be followed by those of othei architects and sculptors until we come to Masaccio, who was the first to improve design in painting, when we shall see what a debt is due to liim for his new discovery. I have chosen Jacopo as a worthy beginning for this second part, and shall follow the order of styles, showing in each life the difficulties presented by their heautiful, difficult and most honourable arts.