Lives of the Most Eminent 143 Minim - Forgotten Books

L I V E S

O F TH E M O ST EM I NENT

143min im ,

THE ORDER OF S. DOMINIC.

[1a flrrbitmfi

L I VE S

THE MOST EMINENT

nin ma, 5m um 2< 3 m

THEORDER OFS. DOMINIC.

TRANSLATED FROM THE ITALIAN OF

f ather m arrh m nf tbt 5am? finfititm ,

WITH NOTES, ETC.,

BY THE REV . C . P. ME EHAN .

IN TWO VOLUMES.

VOL.

DUBLIN

JAME S DUFFY, 7, W E LL ING T ON QUAY .

1 85 2 .

CONTENTS .

CHAPTER I.

Fra Bartolom m eo della Por ta,

CHAPTER 1 1 .

Or igi n , Coun try, an d St udies of Fr a Bartolom m eo della Porta—Vicissi tudes of h i s Youth—Th e Pai n t i n gs of this first Epoch

CHAPTER III.

Bartolom m eo, a t t h e i n stan ce of t h e Religious an d h i s Fr ien ds,

r esum es h i s Pen cil—He appoin ts Mafi ot t o Alb er t i n elli h i s Br o

t h er’s Guardian—He studi es an d im i tates Lion ardo da Vin ci

His i n tim acy with Raffaello da Urbin o—Works executed un dert h e in fluen ce of these two celebrated Masters— Th e Beauties ofth is Secon d Period of t h e Artistic Car eer of Fr a Bartolom m eodella Porta ,

CHAPTER IV.

Fr a Bartolom m eo goes t aVen ice—Th e Pain tin gs h e un dertook to execute i n that city—Hi s r etur n to Floren ce—Artisti c par tn ershipw ith Mariotto Alb er t i n elli— It s dissolution ,

v i CONTENTS .

CHAPTER V.

Fr a Bartolom m eo della Porta adheres still m ore closely to t h e m ethodOf t h e Ven etian s—P

erfection s an d Im perfection s of this n ew

m an n er— Pain tin gs that belon g to i t ,

CHAPTER VI.

Fra Bartolom m eo i n Rom e—Wh o was Fr a Mar ian o Fetti, for whomthis pain ter executed t wo large pictures —He begin s to followM ichelan giolo Buon arroti— He return s to Floren ce— Pain tin gs i nthis fourth an d last m an n er

,

CHAPTER VII.

Fr a Bartolom m eo goes to Lucca,Pis t oja an d Pram—Pai n tin gs which

h e executed in these cities— Return s to Floren ce a t t h e tim e oft h e vis it of Leo X.

—His health fai li n g,h e i s obliged to go agai n

to Pian di Mugn on e an d Le cce t o.

CHAPTER VI I I.

Last Pain tin gs of Fra Bartolom m eo—His Death an d Eulogy—Hi sDesign s an d h is Pupils,

Sum m ary of t h e Pai n ti n gs by Fra Bartolom m eo dclla Porta, takenfrom an an cien t M.S . i n t h e Archives of San Mar co, Flor en ce ,en ti tled Registry com m en cin g 1 493 , an d ter m i n ati n g i n1 5 1 6

,

Pain tin gs whi ch were sold,

Pa in tin gs by which h e ear n ed n o m on ey,

CHAPTER IX.

Fra Giovan n i Giocon do, of Veron a, Archi t ect, En gin eer, an d A n tiquar ian , 1 4 1

CONTENT S .

CHAPTER X.

Fra Marco Pen sa b en an d Fr a Marco Mar aveja, Ven etian Pain tersExam in ation an d Con futation of Federici ’s opin ion regardi n g t h efirst of these Artists,

CHAPTER X1 .

Fr a Guglielm o Marcillat, a celebrated Pain ter on Glass, Architect an dPain ter— His works i n Rom e, i n Corton a, i n Arezzo, an d i n

Perugia,

CHAPTER X I I.l'

r a Paoli n o da Pi s toja, disciple of Fr a Bartolom m eo della Porta,

CHAPTER XI I I.

Fr a Dam ian o (la Bergam o, t h e celebrated In t ar sia t or—Hi s works i n

h is own coun try, i n Bologn a, an d elsewhere— Hi s disciples,

CHAPTER XIV.

Of som e m in or Ar tists of t h e S ixteen th Cen tury,

CHAPTER XV.

S ister Plautilla Nell i,t h e Dom in ican Pai n tress, an d other Nun s of t h e

sam e In stitute, wh o cultivated Pai n ti n g, M in iature, an d t h e

Plastic Ar t,i n Floren ce

,Prato

,an d Lucca

,

CHAPTER XVI.Father Ign atius Dan ti

,Mathem atician

, Cosm ographer, En gin eer, an d

Architect,

CHAPTER XVI I.Father Dom en ico Por t igian i, a m ost skilful Caster i n Bron ze, an d

vii

CONTENTS .

CHAPTER XVI I I .

Father Dom en ico Pagan elli of Faen za, Architect an d C ivil En gin eer,

CHAPTER XIX .

Father Giovan n i Battista Mayn o, t h e Span ish Pain ter, an d FatherJcan An dré , a Fren ch Pain ter,

CHAPTER XX .

FatherVin cen zo Maculan o, Cardin al of Holy Church ; an d som e otherArchitects, an d C ivil an d M ilitary En g in eers,

CHAPTER XX I .Origin of t h e presen t Mem oir s ; an d Epilogue,

I llus tr a t ion s of som e Pa i n t in gs i n t h e Imper i al an d Royal Gallery ofth e Flor en t i n e Academy :

Th e Baptism of Jesus Chr ist, a Pain tin g on Pan el,by Giotto da

Bon don e da Vespign an o,

Legen d of S. Hum i lity, a Picture on Pan el, by Buon am ico Buffali n acco,

Legen d of S. Hum ility, a Picture on Pan el,by Buon am ico Buffal

m acco,

Of som e Pa in tin gs, by Era Giovan n i An gelico del Magello, whichdecorate a Deposition from t h e Cross

,

S . Barbera, a Pain tin g on Pan el , by Cos im o Rosselli ,Docum en ts to Illustrate t h e Mem oirs of t h e Dom in ican Artists,

MEMO I R SOF THE MOST

(Eminen tmin tt ra, ém lptnra, 3<flu flair ,OF THE

ORDER OF ST. DOMINIC .

BOOK I .

C H A PT E R I .

FRA BARTOLOMMEO DELLA PORTA.

INTRODUCTION.

THE failur e of Savon ar ola’s attem pted Reform , withwhi ch we closed t h e fir st volum e of these Mem oirs, soonproduced i t s frui ts . For when t h e am bition of Lodo ~

vico, (called il Moro ,) 1 h ad open ed a high road for t h e

stran ger to m arch in to t h e fair Lan d en closed by t h eAlps an d sea,

” Italy, in stead of findi n g h er childrenban ded together for h er defen ce , beheld them drawin gthe ir parricidal swords to stab h er to t h e heart. Then ,in deed , this hapless soil , con quered without t h e dignityOf a. patri otic struggle , was overr un an d harried by m er

cen ary hordes ; an d turn ed in to a tour ney-fi eld , WhereSpan iard , Teuton , an d Frenchm an Jousted for everyacre of t h e pen in sula. Thus

, t h e very m en on Whom

Ludovico Sforza, i n t h e year 1 493,in duced Charles VIII . of Fran ce

to m ar ch in to Italy i n order to expel Ki n g Ferdi n an d from Naples. PopeAlexan der VI. was t h e ally of Ludovico.

VOL . II .

2 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERS ,

t h e It ali an s h ad recen tly bestowed a n ew world , weren ow actually di sputin g with them t h e possession of theirown territory ! We h ad lost t h e em pire Of arm s, an d

n oth in g n ow rem ai n ed for us save t h e em pire Of in tellect . When Ju lius II .

,that m an of won derful con cep

tion s , foun d him self un able to drive t h e barbarian s ou t

Of Italy,h e resolved that t h e lan d of h i s bir th should

m ain tain t h e primacy in letters,arts , an d religion ; a pri

m acy that n e ither ambi t ion nor foreign despotism shallever wrest from us , till t h ey shall have deprived us Oft h e ai r w e breathe an d t h e soil upon which we live .

But when death preven ted Julius II . from realizin g h i s

gran d designs , Leo X .,whose heart glowed w ith t h e love

Of Italy , se t about in carn atin g t h e grand idea Of h i s pr edecessor. Then cam e Bem b O an d Sadole t o to occupydi st i n gui sed places n ear t h e person Of t h e n ew Pon t ifi

"

.

Th e youthful Ber oaldo was appoin ted librarian Of t h eVatican , an d Filippo Lasch ar i was charged to in structt h e risin g gen eration i n Greek an d Latin li terature .

Paolo G iov io , Aldo Man uzio , Teb aldeo , Bern ardo Ac

colti,San ti Pagn i n i , Agosti n o Giustin iani , an d a lon g

train Of poets an d learn ed m en shon e like brilliant starsaroun d t h e Pon tiff’s thron e ; an d all kn owledge , hum anan d di vin e , m ight b e said to have taken up i t s abodew ithin t h e halls Of t h e Vatican . The n , as well as at allform er periods , t h e theatre was regarded as an essen tialelemen t of refin em en t , an d Giorgio Trissin o with h i sSofon i sb a , an d Cardin al Bibbien a with t h e C alan dr a ,

l

laid t h e foun dation s, t h e form er, Of tragedy , an d t h e

latt er, of Itali an com edy . Mean while Raffae llo , as sist edby Giulio Rom ano

,Fran cesco Pen n i

,Perin del Vaga ,

Baldassare Peruzzi , an d Giovan n i da Udin e , was pain t

This com edy was perform ed in t h e Vatican , i n presen ce of Pope Leo X.

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S . 3

i n g t h e cham bers of t h e Vat i can . Michelangelo , after

creatin g t h e M03 6, was pain tin g t h e Sybils in t h e Sixtin e , an d furn ishin g design s to Sebastian del Piombo , inorder to eclipse h i s rival Raffael ; whilst Fr a Giocon do ,Giulian o di San Gallo an d Raffael succeeded Bram ant e ,(recen tly deceased ,) i n erectin g t h e most m agn ificenttem ple i n t h e un iverse .

1

But ifw e turn our eyes from alm ightyRom e,an d look

to t h e other provin ces of Italy, w e will everywhere fi n dt h e m ajestic trium ph of arts an d le tters. In t h e halls ofEste we m ay behold Ariosto readin g for Cardin al Ippolito t h e loves an d follies Of Or lando ; Castiglion e am usin gt h e court of Urbin o with h i s Cortegian o ; Floren ce , t h em odern Athen s, learn in g lesson s of policy , arm s

, an d

literature from Gu i cci ar di n i ,Macchiavelli , an d Alam an nii n t h e Rucellai garden s ; Milan gazin g with aston ishmen t on Li on ar do’s “ Last Supper Bologn a en richingherself with t h e last an d m ost perfect OfFr an ci a’s tin tings ; Parm a salutin g t h e risin g glory Of youn g Coreggio ;an d Ve n i ce proudly poin tin g to t h e creation s of Tizianoan d Giorgion e . Thus, at t h e very m om en t when an

ambitious an d audacious Friar was fillin g all Germanywith disorder an d con fusion ; when m en

,wom en , an d

childr en were di scussin g scholastic subtleties an d tim e

hon our ed dogm ata i n t h e piazzas an d on t h e high roads,t h e im itative arts h ad reached their clim ax i n Italy ;an epic poem h ad been created ; tragedy an d comedyrevived ; t h e elegan ce an d truthfuln ess Of Th uci di des,Livy

,an d Tacitus, if n ot surpassed , m ost certain ly rivalled ;

whilst philosophy an d t h e scien ce of t h e divin ity venerated Truth

,despite t h e delir ium s

,atr ocities, an d direful

con fusion that pervaded all society . It w as thus that

1 V. Roscoe’s Leo X.


God, in h i s pity , corrected t h e disorders of t h e t imes ; an dif we were n o lon ger able to give laws to subjugatedpeoples , we were , n evertheless , the ir m asters in civilization . Behold t h e Em peror CharlesV . an d Kin g Fran cisI . bowin g before t h e m arvellous genius of Lion ar do an d

Titian , an d ask yourself does t h e history of an y othercoun try reveal such a Splen di d proof of in tellectualsuprem acy !But that we m ay n ot stray from t h e subject Of these

Memoirs , we will say a few words con cernin g t h e con dition of t h e fi n e arts i n that porten tous sixteen th cen tury .

When we un dertook to write t h e life ofFr a Giovann iAn gelico , an d to develope t h e can on s Of Chr istian ar t ,

our labour was light ; for , indeed, all t h e pain ters of t h e

fourte en th , an d t h e greater part of those who flourishedi n t h e fifte en th cen tury , appeared to us to b e won derfullycon cordan t , an d , as it were , speakin g t h e sam e lan guage .

GO where you wi ll , from on e extremity of Italy to t h eother, an d you will everywhere fin d them evide n cin g t h esame sim plicity, grace , an d in spiration . In fact

,they do

n o t seem to belon g to man y and various schools of pain ting , but to on e fam ily , educated on t h e same prin ciple ,reared 1 11 t h e same way, an d aspirin g to a common glory .

Tran sport Ava n zi an d Dalm asio to Sien a ; Matteo diGiovan n i to Bologn a ; S im on e Mem m i to Rome ; PietroCavallini to Floren ce ; an d they all w ill appear to havebee n de n izen s Of t h e sam e cities , educat ed i n t h e sam e

schools , while t h e sam e m ay b e predicated of Fran cescoFran cia an d Of Pietro Perugino , who ar e like stream letsfrom t h e sam e foun tain source . Re ligion se t t h e im pressof celestial beauty on them all, an d thus made thembrothers .

But , un dertakin g to w rite Of t h e life an d works Of t h ei llustrious painter, Fr a Bartolom meo della Porta , an d

SCULPTORS,AND ARCHITECT S . 5

desirin g to develope t h e gen eral can on s of ar t in t h e six

t een t h cen tury , we feel ourselves alm ost con strain ed toaban don t h e att em pt , an d to con fess our inability . Forn ot on ly do t h e Itali an schools of this period appear t ous various an d discordant

,but we very Often fi n d t h e

same pain ter pursuin g a multipli city an d a variety Ofmethods , so much so , that n ot bein g accustomed to them ,

an d withal desirous t o judge of them , we have everyreason to dre ad fallin g in to error . Some of them we

fi n d expe n di n g allthe ir powers on colour in g, usin g it likean in str um en t from wh i ch they drew sweetest m elodies ;others en richin g design , an d fr ui t fii l Of beauteous form s

whose varied li n es an d graceful attitudes fascin ate t h e eye ;som e

,on t h e othe r han d , n ot so fam ous as colourists , nor so

prom pt as design ers , achievin g won ders in com position ;an d if you would con tem plate t h e m ultitudes they havedepicted en joyin g t h e calm n ess Of peace , or equi pped fordeeds Of arm s— m ovin g i n t h e m azes Of t h e dance or

marchin g i n tr ium phan t procession , they almost persuadeus that in stead Of pain t e rs , they were historians an d poe t s .

Neverthe less, though t h e gre ater part Of them im itatedt h e Tr ue , the ir works very rarely excite a sin gle gen erousse n tim en t i n our souls , an d still m ore rare ly a devoutthought ofheaven . Hen ce we m ay con clude that ar t , i nt h e sixteenth century , either h ad n ot certain an d defin edlaws, or was moderat ed by such as these Th e of ice oft h efi n e ar t s i s to seekwh a t i s ph as i ng ; t h eya r e essen t i allyi m i ta t ive ; a ll t h ei r value con s i s ts i n t h e t r u t h a n d power

of i m i ta t ion ,a n d i n t h e deligh t wh i ch m en exper ien ce by

r eason of t h is gr a t eful i llusion . Pr ovi ded t h is ej ectb e a t ta i n ed , i t m a t t er s n ot wh et h er t h e obj ect s i m i ta t ed b eof t h em selves pleas i n g or m agn if icen t .

”1 Thus ar t , which

P ietr o Giordan i . Opere. vol. u .

,p. 1 2 . Edi zion e del 1 82 1 .


Christianity h ad employed to diffuse civili zation an d toeducat e t h e people— ar t which t h e Church cultivated as

t h e noble lan guage Of pure an d holy affection s was ,

durin g this sixteen th cen t ury , gen erally speakin g, madeancillary to t h e taste s Of t h e un r efi ect i n g, an d t h e pravepassion s Of t h e worldly great.Desce n din g fr om these general con siderations t o otherswhich m ay b e described as partial an d peculiar toReligious ar t , an d in order to defin e t h e boun daries thatdivide t h e pain ters of t h e sixteen th cen tury , from theseof t h e precedi n g ages, we will Observe that they diff erfrom eachOther in three grand principles : in com position ,in decorum , an d in im itation .

Th e an cien ts very wisely di vided t h e vari ous pain tin gsintended for t h e adornmen ts of God’s tem ple , in to twodi stinct classes ; to t h e first belon ged these pictures ,whether on canvas , panel , or i n fresco , to which t h e

tem ple itself,or altar

, was dedicated , an d which werepainted to excite t h e ven eration of t h e faithful . Thesewere so con ceived , that t h e figure of t h e Sain t, isolated ,or otherwise , should presen t itself to t h e eyes Of t h eworshipper, crown ed with t h e glory Of t h e e lect, sin ceno mortal m an could b e esteem ed worthy of such solem nhomage . If t hese pain ti n gs were on panel , they h adt h e form of dypti ch s or t rypt ich s ; an d t h e accessoryfigures were usually depicted in min or dimension s, so as

not t o di stract e ither homage or adm iration from t h e

prin cipal object. TO t h e second class belon ged suchpain tin gs as were solely mean t for t h e decoration of t h etem ple , C loisters , or chapt er-rooms, an d they were calledHISTORIEs ; an d these , accordin g t o t h e ci rcumstan ces oft h e tim es an d history

,represented som e fact strictly i n

accordance with t h e t ruth . Th e sixteen th cen tury overruled an d depreciat ed this order

,so wisely laid down by

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S .

our fathers ; an d i n som e altar-pieces you will oftendi scover m ore con fusion than would b e tolerated i n a

history describin g a lan d or sea fight. Mid such a mult i t ude of accessories— footm en ,

an d horsem en — i t i s almostim possible to discover t h e Sain t, who i s t h e obj ect ofreligious ven eration , sin ce t h e painte r e ither pourtraysh im i n a feeble light, or expen ds himself on irrelevan tadjun cts. Add to all this t h e beauty of lan dscape , t h em ajesty of great buildin gs, t h e exquisite e laboration ofem broideries, an d a hun dred other accessories, all of

which ar e calculated to di stract t h e atten tion , an d topreven t t h e soul from elevatin g it se lf to t h e contem plationof ce lestial an d everlastin g glories.

But sin gularly rem arkable i s t h e di fferen ce betweent h e an cient pain ters an d those of thi s cen tury , i n all thatregards decorum an d decen cy. Scarcely h ad that impure sect of artists whom Savon arola den oun ced , dr unkh i s blood an d sc attered h i s ashes , when they began t ocon tamin ate , not on ly t h e domestic walls, but t h e veryt emples of t h e Etern al, with their infam ous turpit udes.

Havin g either removed or destroyed these chaste pr oduct i on s

, t h e works an d testim on ies of t h e faith of ourforefathers, they substit uted them by in decen t picturesan d in decen t statues, calculated t o extin guish everyspark , n ot on ly of re ligion

,but of modesty. Whosoever

would in vestigate t h e causes of this profan i ty , will findthem i n t h e corruption of this age , i n t h e loss of faithoccasion ed by t h e schism i n t h e West, an d i n t h e ex

cessive s t udy of t h e Mythology. It was utterly im possible that t h e pain ter or t h e sculptor , who h ad devotedh is gen ius to pourtrayin g t h e in iquities of t h e paganOlym pus , could approach t h e holy subj ects furnished byt h e Chri stian religion wi th a pure fan tasy, an d h e musthave failed to raise him self t o high an d holy con cep

8 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

tions . Th e vitiated tast es of artists have occasion edserious evils t o reli gion an d to morali ty i n Italy ; .

n or

will I trust myself to describe them , lest I forget m yse lfin m y in di gn ation .

1 Le t m e rather con gratulate t h e

modern art ists who have rid us of such n auseatin g sub

ject s , con sign i ng t o t h e haunts of in fam y these revoltin gn udities, to which no hon est citizen would give a place

within t h e sacred precin cts of t h e tem ple , n ay, nor withi nh i s dom estic walls .

It n ow rem ain s for us to speak of t h e third an d lastdifferen ce which exist s between these two epochs of

Itali an pain tin g, I m ean of im itation . Throughout t h efour t eenth cen tu ry, ar t m ay b e said to have been tr adit ion al. In t h e fifteen th it took t h e True for i t s on ly m odel ,or , as som e would say, raised it to t h e ideal . Manypain ters of t h e sixteen th cen tury in troduced a s uperst i t ious im itation of t h e Greek an d Rom an statues, inwhich t hey fancied they h ad di scovered t h e most perfectdesign an d t h e most exquisite form s ; as though t h e

Greek an d Rom an sculptors , i n order to arr ive at thisexcellen ce , h ad n ot been obliged to study n ature an d

tr uth . Hence , they did not perce ive that marble very

l Gaye, Carteggio In ed. quotes a MS . ( b y an an on ym ous of t h e sixtee n thcen tur y) n ow i n t h e Magliab ech i L ibrary, from whi ch we m ake t h e follow i n gextr act : “ March 1 9

,1 5 49. They un covered t h e foul figur es ( in S . Maria

del Fior e,) by Baccio Ban din elli. These were Adam an d Eve, a fact thatscan dalized t h e whole city

, which was i n dign an t that t h e Duke would allowsuch thi n gs t o b e placed i n t h e ca thedr al before t h e altar of t h e m ost HolySacram en t. In t h e sam e year was un covered ( i n San to Spirito) a Pietawhich a Floren t i n e sen t to said church. This was saved from destructionsim ply because t h e origin al was t h e in ven tion of Buon ar ot t i . Moder npain ter s an d sculptors, n ow—a-days, produce n o figures on can vas or m arble,except such as ar e calculated to destroy fa ith an d devotion b ut I hope thatGod w ill on e day sen d a sai n t ~ t o overthrow such idolatries .

"Th e t wo

statues of Adam an d Eve were rem oved fr om t h e cathedral A.D . 1 72 2 , an d

ar e at presen t i n t h e Palazzo Vecchio.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 0 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERS ,

four periods, dur in g which Fr a Bartolomm eo graduallyabandon ed t h e ancien t , an d at len gth classed himse lfamon gst t h e m odern , pain t ers . This transition ,

hithertounn oticed , h as caused us lon g an d laborious “

study ,wh i ch , however, we trust m ay prove beneficial to t h ehistory of our arts. Le t us fin ally advert that, as we

writ e this li fe ou t of origin al an d un published documen t s i n t h e archives of S . Marco

, (Floren ce ,) we wi ll notfollow Vasari an d Baldi n ucci in t h e chron ological orderwhich they both have strangely confused .

1

CHAPTER II .

Origin , C oun try, an d Studies ofFr a Bartolom m eo della Porta—Vicissitudes ofh i s Youth—Th e Pa in tin gs of thi s fi rst Epoch.

IN Savign ano , or , as others call it, Savigliano , a smallvi llage six m iles from Prato an d t en from Florence ,2

lived a certain Paul , common ly called t h e Agen t ,”

a

sobrique t which h e in herited from h i s father , Giacomo .

I believe t h e people best owed thi s epithet on h im , b e

cause h e was always disposed to give as m uch assistanceas possible to h i s n eighbours in t h e man agem en t of the iraffai rs ; b e that as it m ay, t h e sobriquet became t h e di s

This r em ark applies solely to t h e Chron ology, for we adm it Vasari ’s accuracy as to facts ; an d, in deed, h e m ight easily have learn ed all t h e particula rs of Fr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s l ife from Fr a Eustachio, t h e m in iaturist of SanMar co, wh o was t h e con tem porary of Fr a Bor t olom m eo. V. vol. i . c. xi ii .of these Mem oirs.

Fr a Bartolom m eo always subscribes him self,Pict or Floren ti n us , an d is

so ca lled i n t h e An n als of San Marco,because, perhaps, h e h ad passed t h e

greater part of h is life i n Floren ce.

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S . 1 1

t i n ct ive title of all h i s descen dan ts .

‘ Paul , i n all probab ili ty, followed t h e father

’

s callin g ; an d be in g a frugalan d well-con ducte d m an , h e soon con trived to pur chasea few fields i n Val d’ Elsa , an d i n San Don ato i n Poggio ,together with a house i n Floren ce , an d began to livem uch m ore com fortably than h i s father. It i s likely,however, that h e did n ot leave t h e n atal village , wheret h e bones of h i s kin dr ed were m oulderin g

,till h e was far

advanced i n years. Havin g married a wom an of h i sown con dition ,

h e h ad of h er two son s : t h e eldest,who was

born A.D . 1 469 , h e called Bartolom m eo , or , as t h e Tus

can s vulgarly pron oun ce it , Baccio ; an d to t h e secon d ,who was born a few years afterwards , h e gave t h e nam e

of Peter. Th e little Baccio grew up ben eath t h e goodparen ts’ care , a pious an d di screet youth , en j oyin g thatgolden m edi ocrity of fortun e which i s equidistan t fromwan t an d opule n ce . Wh en h i s childhood h ad sped by,Paul , fin di n g h i s child to b e of a m ost in telligen t disposi t ion ,

began t o con sider to what profession h e shoulddevote him ; an d, as w e m ay easily suppose that h e h adalready given proof of h i s love for t h e fin e arts , i n whichh e afterwards becam e so distin guished , h e resolved t obrin g h i m to Floren ce to study pain tin g, an d to lodgeh im wi th som e of h i s kin sfolk , who in habited t h e househ e h ad purchased n ear t h e ga t e of San Pier Gat t olin i .On th i s accoun t, in stead of Baccio del Fattorin o , everyon e began to call h im Baccio de lla Porta . On h i s

arrival i n Floren ce , Paul brought Baccio to Ben edetto daMajan o , a ren own ed sculptor an d archit ect, who advisedh im to sen d t h e youth to t h e studi o of Cosimo Rosse lli .2

1 Of this sobri quet, un kn own to all hi stor ian s, we fi n d m en tion i n an

origin al con tr act that we will give am on gst t h e Docum en ts. (V. No. His

surn am e i s un kn own .

Vasari,Vita di Fr a Bartolom m eo di San Marco.

1 2 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

It m ay b e question ed whether Ben edetto da Majanoacted t h e part of a tr ue frien d , when h e suggested toPaul to select out of all t h e Florentin e pain ters, t h e m an

who was t h e leas t di stin gui shed for gen ius an d ar t ; an d

surely h e could n ot have m ade choice of an y masterwho was m ore remarkable for poverty of design .

1 IfBaccio h ad been sent to study un der Dom en ico delGhirlan daj o , in stead of Cosimo Rosselli , h e Should haveh ad a m aster i n every respect superior to t h e latte r , indesign , colourin g , an d com position , an d h e would alsohave been t h e con disciple of that Michelan giolo Buon arotti , who was destin ed t o reflect so much glory on t h et h r ee '

si st er arts .

When Porta began to st udy under Cosim o Rosselli ,t h e latter, just returned from Rome , was advanced inyears, an d obliged to b e assisted in h is works by h i spupil, Piero di Cosimo , an d t h e youn g Mariotto Albe rtin e lli . Le t t h e reader now fan cy what was poor Baccio’scon dition . Th e old m aster

, aban donin g brush an d

pale tte , spen t most of h i s tim e with a select circle of

gossips at t h e furnace , makin g experim en ts in alchemy ;an d Piero di Cosim o , rude i n h i s man n er, an d grosslyirregular in h i s life , was by no means fitted to im partin struction to t h e youn g Savign an ese . Th e sam e m ayb e said ofMariotto Alb er t i n elli , t hen twen ty years ofage , whose con duct was

‘ that of an avowed libertine .

Thus was t h e simple an d ingen uous Porta , who h adbeen brought up i n t h e exercise of every vir t ue , left tohim se lf i n a m ost corrupt city , without a m aster whowas suited to advan ce him i n h is ar t , or com pan ionswhose exam ple was calculated to guide an d stim ulatehim in t h e pursuit of virtue . Although n ow arrived at

Vasari, Vita di Cosim o Rossell i.

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECTS . 1 3

t h e period of life when on e fee ls t h e n ecessity of lovingan d bein g beloved

,h e h ad no sympathies in com mon

e ither wi th Cosim o or Piero , whose pur suits were so

widely differen t fr om h i s own , an d h e therefore resolvedt o em ulate Alb er t i n elli in t h e st udy ofar t . Th e work oft h e day over, Mariotto betook him self to t h e win e shops ,an dBac cio to t h e churches,wh i lstPiero hunted game i n t h efields , an d Cosim o spe n t h i s even in gs dr eami n g of t h e

philosopher’s ston e ! Thus di d Porta , i n t h e years of

illusion s, sen tim en t, an d en thusiasm , keep h i s soul unblem ished an d h i s heart un corrupted , though livin g inan atm osphere of vice . Soon er than associate with t h e

idle an d dissipated,h e devoted him self to study, to read

ing, to retirem en t , an d prayer . Hi s recreation was toSi t an d listen to those who were esteem ed as wise an d

pruden t ; an d h e resorted to t h e C loisters an d chur ches tohear e loquent orators developin g t h e great Evangelicaldogmata . In a word , in other tim es an d un der otherm aste rs, Baccio would have revived t h e examples of t h eBlessed Giovan n i in virtue as well as in ar t .

Mean while , it every day became apparent that t h eprecepts of Cosim o did n ot ten d to advan ce him i n t h e

ar t of pain tin g ; for h e was n ot on ly feeble i n design,

crude in colourin g, an d m iserably defective i n com position

,but h i s figures were so ign oble that , with t h e ex

cept i on ofAn dr ea del Castagn o , there never was anotherartist so in sen sible t o t h e beautiful i n n atur e .

‘ Baccioan d Mariotto therefore de termi n ed to leave Rosselli

’

s

school , an d to apply them selves to study in t h e house of

In m y opin ion there is on ly on e work by this m aster which rai ses h i mabove m edioc r ity. It is a fresco i n t h e church of S. Am brose, Floren ce, r epresen tin g t h e m iracle of t h e m ost holy Sacram en t i n which there i s a veryfin e group of beautiful fem ales. At t h e en d of this volum e we wi ll give ani llustration of a work of h is n ow i n t h e Gallery of t h e Academ y of Desi gn .


t h e former, n ear t h e gate of San Pietro Gat toli n i , takin gt h e ancien t m asters, an d particularly Masaccio , for theirm odels ; an d as Baccio w as fascin ated by t h e shadi n g an d

colourin g of Lion ardo da Vin ci , h e began t o study h i sworks, m akin g, i n a shor t tim e , such rapid progress i noutlin e , shadin g , t h e m an agem en t of ligh t an d colouri n g, that h e won t h e reputation of bein g on e of t h e mosttalen te d of t h e youths who were then cultivati n g ar t .

At thi s period paintin g h ad been placed under t h e tutelage of sculptur e an d goldsm ith’s work , an d , in deed ,ther e were then very few am on gst t h e Floren tin e painters who h ad n ot studied t h e rudi m en ts of sculpture an d

of t h e goldsmith’s ar t . Th i s m ay b e predi cated of

Lion ardo da Vin ci , San dro Botticelli , Loren zo di Credi ,An drea del Sarto , an d others ; som e of whom likewisestudied archit ectur e , sculptur e , castin g i n bron ze , M ello ,

an d pain ti n g : a sad reflection on our age , i n which itrarely happens that an artist finds him self equal to morethan on e ar t .

Lorenzo t h e Magn ificent , h ad expen ded enormoussums i n pur chasi n g obj ects of t h e fi n e arts, which werebeautifully di sposed i n h is garden , on t h e Piazza di SanMarco , so that t h e loggie were filled with choicestsculptur es, as were t h e alleys an d chambers ; n or h ad h efailed to collect pain tin gs by t h e best master s of Italy ,an d other coun tries. Indepen den tly of bein g an

orn amen t to t h e place , they were a school an d academ yfor youn g pain ters

, sculptors, an d all pe rsons practisin gt h e various bran ches of design . Be rtoldo

, t h e Florentin esculptor, an aged an d experien ced master, who h adstudied under Don atello

, was t h e custodian of t h e gran dobject s in this garden .

‘ Here h e gave lessons to all t h e

Am on gst those wh o studied pain tin g an d sculpture in this garden were


youthful cultivators of ar t . Here all t h e Florentineartists were won t to assem ble . Loren zo t h e Magn ificen t,en couraged them by h i s prom ises an d hon ours : t h eglorious gen ius of youn g Buon ar ot t i stim ulated t h e mosten thusiastic rivalry. Th e lof ty strain s of t h e poets wholooked on all t h e imagin ative arts as sprin gin g from on e

comm on source , hym n ed t h e praises of t h e artist’sSplen did creation s . Pin dar us an d Ti r t eus san g t h e

glories of t h e Greeks, who won laurels on t h e batt le-field ;an d why should n ot t h e bards of Florence en kin dle inthese youn g bosom s t h e love of a Sim ilar glory ? It was

truly a gran d spectacle to behold t h e flower of Italian

gen i u s assembled there— to hear t h e strain s of Politian ,Ben ivi en i , an d Loren zo t h e Magn i ficen t

— to hear t h ephi losophical disputation s of Pico della Miran dola, an dMarsilio Ficin o ; whilst chisel an d hamm er made t h e

m arble rin g, an d t h e can vas glowed with all t h e beant eous tin tin gs of t h e pain ter . Thus was this garden a

lyceum for t h e philosopher ; an arcadia for t h e poet ; an dan academ y for t h e artist. Caracci

,in Bologn a, was t h e

on ly m an who ever revived an ythin g approaching

Mariotto Alb er t i n elli , conscious of h i s im perfection i ndesign , obtain ed perm ission to en t er this school ; an d

although Vasari does n ot state it , I th i n k Porta did t h esam e , as h i s pict ures give us every reason to believe thath e applied him se lf t o t h e study of t h e statues. Mostcertain ly h e n ever could have given such relief to h i sfigures, n ay, n or such correct design ,

i f h e h ad n ot wellunderstood t h e m anagem en t of li ght an d shadi ng , an d

Michelan giolo, Fran cesco Rus t icci , Torr igian o, Gr an acci , Credi , Alb er t i n elli ,Baccio da Mon te Lupo

,e t c. When t h e Medici were expelled Floren ce,

a gr eat part of these objects of ar t was lost. V. Roscoe’s Loren zo de ’Medici.

1 6 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERs ,

spe n t many years con tem plating t h e antique an d true .

‘

As soon as they h ad made con siderable proficien cy,

(Mariotto havin g adopted Baccio’s style of colourin g ,)th ey began t o pain t

,an d t o store up i n a com m on f i m d,

whatever they earn ed by the ir production s ; a planwhich was followed by Polidoro da Caravaggio an d

Maturin o,in Rome

,both of whom resemble Porta an d

Alb er t i n elli .

For wan t of necessary document s we have not beenable t o di scover all t h e works which they produced at

this period . Vasari , however , assures us that they pain tedvery man y Madon n as for t h e city of Florence . Tomention ,

”

says h e , “ on ly such as came fr om Baccio’spen cil, on e of them , which i s very beautiful , i s n ow int h e possession of Filippo di Averardo Salviati , an d i smuch estee m ed by him . Another was bought some timeago by Pier Maria delle Pozze , who , bein g a virtuosoan d knowin g i t s rare m er its , would n ot par t with it foran y amoun t. Pier del Pugliese h ad a Madon n a carvedin marble , by Don atello , (in b assor eli evo ,) an exquisitework , for t h e preservation of which , h e caused a li ttlewooden tabern acle , with two doors , t o b e m ade , in ordert o en shrin e it. Within th i s tabernacle , Baccio pain tedtwo little histories , on e of which was t h e Nativi ty of ourLord , t h e other Hi s Ci rcum cision . These h e pain ted insuch perfect m in iature , that no work in oil can surpassthem ; an d on t h e outside of said doors, h e paintedAnn un ciation i n Ch i aroscur o . In these beauteousworksthat still rem ain , we easily discover t h e first dawni n gs ofPorta’s gen ius ; so well designed an d coloured ar e thesedelightful little figures. Rosini h as en graved on e of

Lan zi i s also of this opin ion . V. History of Pain tin g, Tuscan SchoolSe con d Epoch.


between it an d t h e pain tin gs in Baccio’s first manner.Th e tin tin gs an d man agem en t of t h e drape ry seem t o b e

so m any con vi n cin g argum en ts i n our favour . Th e

cruden ess of Outli ne , whi ch rem in ds us of Cosim o Rosselli , an d which Porta subsequen tly soft e n ed i n h i s otherworks, i s here very apparen t. If t h e figures Of t h e

An ge l an d of t h e Virgin b e not very e legan t, we cann otbut adm ire t h e i n gen uity an d sim plicity of a pain t e rwho flourished t owar ds t h e close of t h e fift een th cen tury .

But where we recogn ise t h e m aster’s han d , i s i n t h e halffigure of t h e Etern al Father that h e pain ted i n t h e upperpart of t h e picture , revealin g itself am id t h e clouds , an d

surroun ded by a choir of m ost beautiful an d gracefullittle an gels. Here we trace a close resem blan ce to t h eother works by Baccio , an d this an n oun ces a m ost ableartist. I will finally observe that t h e garm en ts of t h eAnge l an d Virgin ar e em broidered wi th g old , a peenli ar i ty which we do n ot fi n d in Porta

’

s late r production s .

Whilst these pain tin gs were i n progress, there cam e t o

Florence a won derful m an , who was destin ed to producea great im pression on t h e soul of Baccio della Port a, an dt o in fluence h is future life . This was Fr a Gerolam oSavon arola. In 1 481 h e visited Floren ce for a briefpe riod ; an d i n 1 489 h e returned thither at t h e in vitationof Loren zo de’ Medici . We have elsewhere Spoken ofthis gr eat Christian orator, an d now will con fi n e our

se lves to such fac t s as regard t h e pain ter’s con n ectionwith h im .

It i s probable that Baccio h ad heard of him i n t h e

Medicean Garden , an d that h e h ad been an ocular witness Of t h e effects which followed Savon arola

’

s preachi n g .

In fact, h e h ad already cap t ivated t h e m ost select portionof t h e artists , philosophers , an d poets wh o fr equen tedthat spot consecrat ed t o genius ; an d here , t oo , was


i n i tat ed that fr ien dship wh i ch united Porta , Credi , Botticelli , Ben ivi en i , Miran dola , an d other illustrious characte rs . Savon arola wisely thought that popular e loquen ceshould never b e di ssociated from t h e study of t h e fin earts, phi losophy , or t h e muses, an d that i t s nature an d

object was closely iden tified with them . Hen ce , aftert h e day’s work was over, t h e pain ter, poet , sculptor , an d

ph i losopher retired from t h e beauteous garden to t h e

n eighbourin g church of San Marco , to list en to t h efervid eloquen ce of Fr a Gerolam o . Baccio was so fas

ci n at ed, that h e could n ot live without t h e Fr iar ; an d as

often as h e ascen ded t h e pulpit , h e was earliest i n att endan ce , an d t h e devou test of h i s followers ; so that h i ssoul w as di vided between ar t an d eloquen ce . Then didh e fi n d t h e m an who was worthy of h i s fri en dship— t h e

m an whom h e could make t h e deposit ory of h i s con fi

den ce . A mute an d eloquen t lan guage un i ted t h e

imagin ative soul of t h e pain te r with t h e scath i n gspirit of t h e preacher . In fact , when Savonarola com

m an ded t h e Floren tine ar tists to make solemn reparationt o that Christian decorum which the ir pencils an d Chiselsh ad outraged, Baccio was t h e fi rst to lay down at h i s

feet all h i s design s i n t h e n ude , an d such other works assinn ed again st m odesty. It i s alm ost superfluous to statethat th i s fri en dship an d famili arity irritated Alb er t i n elli ;for, though h e h ad very little sym pathy with Baccio’spursuits hitherto , n ow that h e saw h i m takin g pleasur ei n n othi n g e lse than spiritual can ticles an d t h e cathedr at i e exegeses of t h e Friar , h e ren oun ced all hope of

h i s compan ion ship . Mariotto,therefore , ceased to f re

quen t Baccio’s society, an d havin g Obtai n ed t h e patronage of Alfon sin a de ’ Medici

,se t to work alon e .

1 But

Vasari, Life of Mariotti Alb er t i n elli .


h e cont inued thus on ly for a brief period, for when Pierode

’

Medi ci was expelled in 1 494 , aft er havin g str iven t o

destroy t h e sem i spen t Republic , h e lost t h e protection ofAlfon sin a, an d then re turn ed to Baccio , who rece ivedhim with all cour t esy an d kin dn ess . Nevertheless, farfrom adoptin g Porta’s reli gious ideas , when t h e two part ies kn own as Piagn on i an d Ar rabbiati spr un g up i nFloren ce , Mariotto soon espoused t h e latter , w h o weret h e im placable en em ies of Savon arola, an d con sequen tlyof Baccio . So te rm i n ated all com m unication betweenAlb er t i n elli an d h i s

‘ quon dam colleague : so term in ate dthat sym pathy be tween t h e twain which m ade Vasariwrite that they were “

on e body an d on e soul .”l Baccio ,i t i s tr ue , loved Alb er t in elli , but we have already h in tedat t h e charact er of t h e latte r , an d will place it i n a

clearer light as w e proceed. At this period I wi ll m en

tion on ly two pain tin gs by our artist,on e sm all , an d t h e

other very large . Th e first i s t h e portrait of Fr a Gerolamo Savonarola , a tribute of aff ection which t h e pain te rren dered to t h e m an who h ad so cfli caciously spoken t o

h i s heart. He gives us only t h e head of t h e Friar , mostexquisit ely m odelled an d colour ed ; an d I do n ot hesitatet o assert

,that no other por tr ai t m ore clearly develops t h e

workin g of a soul absorbed i n t h e con tem plation of a

gigan tic proj ect. Th e two cornelians at Rom e an d F10

rence , though fi n ely elaborated , cann ot b e com par ed t othis likeness of t h e orator , in which there i s n o exagge

ration .

2 Rem oved to Ferrara, I kn ow n o t whe n , it wassubsequen tly restored t o Floren ce by Filippo di Alamanno Salviati . It subsequen tly adorned t h e cell of S .

Vasari, Life of Mar iotti Alb er t i n elli.He wrote a t foot of it : Th e effi gy of Ger olam o, of Ferrar a, t h eprophet

se n t by God.” A very good copy of it h as been m ade by t h e celebratedpain ter An t i n or i it is n ow i n t h e possession of Man elli , i n Floren ce.

scur r r on s , AND ARCHITECT S . 2 1

Catherine de’ Ricci , in Prato , who ven er a t ed i ts or igi n al.W h en t h e mon astery was suppressed it passed in to t h epossession ofEm olao Rub i er i , (of Prato ,) who preservesit with reveren t ial love .

‘

Th e secon d pain tin g i s t h e gran d fresco , represen tin gt h e Fin al Judgm en t , i n t h e chapel of t h e cem et ry of t h ehospital of San ta Maria Nuova . Ger ozzo Din i , whocaused t h e said chapel t o b e built

,h ad requested Baccio

to pain t within i t s pr ecin t s som e subj ect sui ted to t h echaracter of t h e place ; an d t h e ar tist very judiciouslypain ted t h e Resur rection , as though h e would thusim press sufferin g hum an ity , with t h e hope an d con solation of t h e better life . There ,

”

says Vasari , “ h e beganto fresco t h e Judgm en t, whi ch h e con ducted so diligen tlyi n t h e part h e fin ished , that h e added to h i s fam e , an d

was much lauded for havin g depicted t h e glory of

Par adi se an d Chr ist, with t h e Twe lve Apostles j udgin gt h e Twelve Tribes, wh ich with their m ost beautifuldr aperies ar e softly coloured . Th e design , which h eleft un fin ished , represen ts t h e figures dragged down tohe ll— the ir despair, agon y

, an d shame of everlastin gdeath ; an d on e easily recogn i ses t h e con tentmen t an d

joy . 0f t h e Saved , albeit t h e work b e im perfect, as h eatte n ded more to religion than to pain tin g .

”

An d e lsewhere : “ This work i s highly esteemed ,for i n this style , there could b e nothi n g grander .

”

In

order that i t s par ts an d en semble m ay b e better un derstood , we will m ake a few rem ar ks. When Vasari wasw riting of th i s Fin al Judgm en t , h i s m em ory must havefailed h i m , as it oft en did i n regard of other pain tin gsfor you would vain ly seek for these Twelve Tribes ,w ith their m ost beautiful draperi es, softly colour ed

1 Bi b liograph i a Pratese, p. 9 . This port rait i s m en tion ed by Vasari .


unless, indeed , these words have referen ce to t h e

im m ense multitude of t h e reprobat e an d elect, accordin gt o t h e Evan geli cal sen t en ce .

1 It seem s that i n thispain tin g , Baccio derived h i s inspiration from a sim i larwork

,which t h e heaven ly im agin ation of t h e An ge lico

h ad executed on t h e doors of t h e armory, in t h e churchof t h e Ann unciation . Like t h e latter, h e represen tsChrist t h e Judge , seat ed on t h e Clouds , i n t h e sam e

attit ude an d appar el ; an d t h e Virgi n , who i s si ttin g at

h i s side, although too rem ote from Fr a An geli co

’

s idealtype , appears to us to b e a repetition of what t h e latterh ad design ed. Th e Apostles, who surroun d t h e SupremeJudge

,must b e numbered amon gst t h e most beautiful

an d perfect figures that Baccio executed in h i s youth ,whether we con sider design ,

colouri n g, or expression .

Som e ar e of opin ion that Raffae llo availed himself oft h e upper par t of Baccio’s Judgm en t, when h e pain tedin t h e Vatican that miracle of ar t , kn own as t h e Disputeof t h e Sacram en t. I will not undertake to asseveratethi s . I will , however, observe that on e of t h e Apostlesrepresen ts t h e Blessed An ge lico . It i s t h e bald oldm an , (a three-quar t er figur e ,) whose eyes ar e ben tdown wards. Som e fancy that they recognise h i s portraiti n t h e figure of a Domi n ican , whose profile we see

amongst t h e elect ; bein g led into th i s belief by Vas ari ,who , not rem ember in g t h e precise position , erred i nstatin g that it was i n t h e under part of t h e pain tin g ;whereas , it i s i n t h e uppe r. A n d

, indeed , t h e portraitof t h e An gelico that Vasari himse lf h as given , i n t h e

secon d edition of h i s Lives of t h e Pain ters, i n everyrespect resem bles that of t h e Apostle of which I havespoken . Although Baccio h ad design ed t h e en tirehist ory of t h e Judgmen t , h e coloured on ly t h e upper part

I Mat t h . xix. 2 8 .


of it ; t h e rest having been fin ished by Mariotto Albertin elli , who in troduced in to t h e com position Gi ulianoBuggi ar di n i , h i s disciple , himself, t h e i n fi r m ar i an

, som e

fr iars skilled i n surgery , an d on t h e sides Ger ozzo an d

h i s wife , who caused that Judgm en t to b e pain ted . Littleof t h e un der part of thi s work rem ain s ; for , on t h e destruction of t h e chapel of t h e cem e t ry, t h e wall was sawedthrough , i n order to tran sport it to t h e court-yard n ear t h eact ualh ospi t al an d t h e pain tin greceived very con siderablein jury. Th e hum idity of t h e place m ust soon com pletei t s en tire ruin . We will fin ally rem ark that t h e court~

yard i s low an d narrow ,an d calculated to destroy all

optical illusion ,as t h e figures ar e of con siderable di m en

sion s : whereas , if t h e whole work were placed i n a betterlight , an d elevated higher than it i s, we w ould b e betteren abled to appreciate t h e con ception an d workman shipof Porta an d Alb er t i n elli .1

Mean wh i le,

r

t h e term in ation of Savon arola’s career wasapproachin g . Voices of m en ace an d bloody deeds presagedt h e trem en dous ruin that was gatherin g over h i s head .

Hi s en emies, w h o , up to that moment , were kept withincertain lim i t s , n ow resolved on ven gean ce , proceeded toopen outrage . Baccio , seein g t h e terrible con spiracy ,ceased to pain t t h e Final Judgm ent , an d left it im perfeet. On t h e e ighth of April , 1 498, t h e Florentin es,kn own as t h e Arrabbiati , m arched in military array tot h e con ven t of San Marco , to wreak their fury on

Savon arola an d those who h ad ai ded him in h i s attem ptat Reform . More than five hundred citizen s, com m andedby Fran cesco Valori , took up the ir position with i n t h e

walls , to defen d Fr a Ger olam o’

s life . Two hun dred oft h e friars who were well arm ed , added them se lves to

1 In t h e Gallery of t h e Utfi zj there ar e som e origin al design s of thisLast Judgm en t, executed by Fr a Bartolom m eo w ith a pen .

2 4 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS,

Valor i’

s combatants, an d resolved to make a desperatedefen ce . Baccio della Porta , who was n ot so good a sol

di er as h e was a pain te r, wishing withal to act t h e partof a true frien d , although terror-stricken

,took refuge

within t h e besieged con ven t. Here h e foun d Fr aBen edetto , t h e min iaturist, a much braver m an

, wh o

stood prepared to fight to t h e death . Fin din g all t h edoors barricaded , an d t h e defen ders on t h e alert

, t h e

Ar rabbiati se t fi r e to t h e gates of t h e church an d con vent.Th e Piagn on i then showed them selves to b e leal t o theirmaster, an d began to discharge their cross-bows an d

harquebuses from t h e roof, belfry, an d win dows. Th e

fr iars , though some of them would gladly have dr awn t h esword , collected round Savon arola i n t h e choir , an d there ,prostrate before t h e Holy Sacram en t, besought God t o

aid an d have pity on them . Mean while , death an d fli ghth ad thin n ed t h e ran ks of t h e b ese iged . On e of them ,

Valori,who despair ed of victory , left t h e con ven t , an d

h e,with h i s wi fe an d tender son , were slain on t h e

in stant . Th e assailan ts, havin g forced their way in tot h e church , con tam in ated it with blood an d carn age ;an d when t h e adverse parties engaged i n han d-t ohand conflict

,on e m ay fancy t h e horror of t h e

spectacle m i d flam e an d smoke , an d t h e groans an d

blasphem ies of t h e wounded an d dyin g . A German,

who was an excellen t marksman , clam bered up into t h epulpit

, an d fired , without mercy , on t h e Arrabbiat i . As

t h e latter gain ed groun d , they rushed to t h e choir , butsuch was t h e resistan ce which they exper ien ced from t h e

n ar row di m en sion s of t h e place , an d t h e bravery of t h e

m en who opposed them , that they failed t o Open a

passage t o i t s in terior. Fin ally , havi n g sealed t h e walls ,they attacked t h e Piagn on i , in fron t an d flan k . At thisj uncture , poor Baccio , who at first gave some proof of

2 6 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERs

then surrendered t o Peter whatsoever propert y h e h ad ,together with h i s right to h i s patrim ony , an d havin gcharged Alb er t i n elli to finish t h e Final Judgm en t i n

San ta Maria Nuova , (for which h e h ad received t h egreater part of t h e stipulated paym en t ,) h e se t ou t at

on ce for Prato . July 2 6,AD . 1 500, h e fulfilled h i s vow,

by takin g t h e habit of t h e Preach i n g -Friars i n h is

thirtieth year. Retain in g h i s baptismal n am e , h e w as

admitted amon gst t h e re ligious of t h e choir . In t h e followin g year , h e m ade h i s religious profession

, an d

re turned to t h e conven t of San Marco , Fl oren ce .

‘ Thissudden resolution gave great ann oyan ce to Porta’sfrien ds ; an d as to Mariotto Alb er t i n elli , Vasari in form s

us“ that h e was alm ost out of h i s m i nd for t h e loss of

h i s com pan ion ; an d so astounded was h e by t h e fact,that h e almost became desperate Nevertheless, ifMariotto di d n ot hate t h e Friars, of whom h e was con

s tan t ly speakin g,

evil , an d if h e h ad not taken part witht h e faction again st Fr a Gerolam o , h i s love for Baccio

l Vasari an d t h e Chr on icles of t h e Con ven t of San Dom en ico,Prato

,

con firm this. But as Father della Valle question s it, we will cite a n oticepreserved i n Martin i’s “M iscellan ee,” an d published by t h e author of t h eBi b liogr afia Pratese (p . “ 2 8 t h Septem ber , 1 560. I

,Alessan dr o

Guardin i, havin g gon e to t h e con ven t of 8 . Marco i n Floren ce , to m akei n quiries an en t Fra Bartolom m eo, t h e pai n ter of that Order

,Father

On ofrio Dazzi in form ed m e that'

Fra Bartolom m eo was i n vested i n t h e

con ven t of Prato m an y years ago ; an d said O n ofri o i s n ow e ighty-sixyears of age. This was wr itten on t h e 8 t h of Septem ber, 1 560. Re

turn in g to Prato to exam i n e t h e Chr on i cle of San Domen i co i n '

t hat ci ty,Fra Cherubin o, t h e Superior showed m e som e fragm en ts of said Chr on icle,which state that Fr a Bartolom m eo, a m ost excellen t pain ter, wh o h adthis n am e i n t h e world, was born in Savign an o, an d took t h e habit of t h eOrder i n Prato i n said con ven t, of wh ich h e was a child. This wasi n t h e year 1 500 (July 2 6t h ) . In t h e f ollowi n g year h e m ade h i s profossion .

”


would have made h im take t h e habit i n t h e samem onast ery .

” We will offer no remark on these words ,as t h e facts alr eady stated , as well as these that remain tob e told , must clear up t h e truth .

‘

This first per iod of Porta’s artistic life i s neither t h emost fruitful nor t h e most glorious. All h i s works (ofthis period) eviden ce t h e manner an d precepts of CosimoRosselli , an d part icularly a certain timidity which h esoon aban doned . Hi s colouring i s vigorous, h i s shadingwell defined , an d t h e draperies very beautiful . Nevert h eless, I regard h i m as harsh i n outlin e , an d weak i nairy perspective—defects of h i s age an d early teachin g .

But Porta , who was dest ined to revive t h e examples ofFr a Giovan n i Angelico , in asmuch as t h e n ew tendencies of art perm i tted, triumphed over all these defectsdurin g t h e seven teen years h e passed in t h e Dom inicancloisters , where h e m ay b e sai d to have commenced h i sglorious career .

1 V . Vasari’s Life of Mariotto Alb er t i n elli .

2 8 MEMOIRS o r EMINENT PAINTERS ,

CHAPTER III .

Fr a Bartolom m eo, at t h e in stan ce of t h e Reli gious an d h i s Frien ds, resum es

h is Pen cil—He appoin ts Mariotto Alb er t i n elli h i s Br other’s GuardianHe studi es an d im itates Lion ardo da Vin ci— Hi s In tim acy with Rafi‘

aello

da Urbin o—Works executed un der t h e In fluen ce of these t wo celebratedMasters— Th e Beauties of this Secon d Period of t h e Artistic Car eer ofFr a Bartolom m eo della Porta.

IN t h e calm silen ce of h i s cell , mid t h e austerities of t h eC loister, Porta was a prey to profound an d sadden in greflection s . He h ad seen a people filled with en thusiasmacclaimin g h i s bosom friend as a Sain t an d an Apostle ;an d , after a little while , that sam e people shiverin g t h eidol they adored t h e day before , an d overwhelm in g itwith con tem pt an d ruin . He rem embered how Savonarola h ad lovin gly laboured to preserve morality i nFloren ce— how h i s manly heart throbbed for h is country’s freedom— an d t h e reward of all these noble aspiration s was t h e blazin g pyre ! Wh y, then , Should h eexercise h i s ar t an d gen i us to glorify a country whichslaves an d libertin es were destroyin g ? How could h easpire to b e a great pain t er, when n on e but obsceneproductions foun d favour with t h e Floren tin es ? Thistem pest of rem em bran ces an d affecti on s ren dered poorBaccio in capable of resumin g h i s pen cil . On h i s returnto Floren ce , h e was for a wh i le dom iciled i n t h e n o

vitiate of San Marco ; an d h e h as, as it were , chron icledh i s soj ourn by a paintin g which h e executed i n t h e saidnovitiate . It is for this reason Father della Valle


suspected that h e di d n ot take t h e habit i n Prato , but i nSan Marco at Floren ce .

l Having spent some time indevout exercises, h e was successively prom oted to t h eOrder of Deacon ; but, not havin g m ade t h e n ecessarystudies, h e was not ordained a priest.There was then i n t h e con ven t of San Marco , t h ecelebrated Orien talist, San ti Pagn i n i of Lucca , a m an of

w on derful gen ius , learning, an d piety . Educated accordi n g to t h e severe disciplin e of Savon arola, who h adban ished Scholasticism from h i s convent , an d substitutedt h e study of t h e Sacred Scriptures , an d Orien tal languages ; Father Pagn i n i h ad applied h imse lf to t h e samewith m ost happy results. In th i s illustrious theologian ,Fr a Bartolom m eo della Porta foun d a frien d

, a brother,

a n d a faithful appreciator of h i s m erits . In a word,

Pagn i n i was to Porta , what S . An ton in o was to Fr aAn gelico . Not on ly four years h ad passed, as VasaIi

says , sin ce Fr a Bartolomm eo h ad aban don ed pain tin g,b ut five , an d mayhap six 2 Father San ti Pagn i n ihavin g been elect ed Prior of t h e co n ven t of San Marco

,

i n June , 1 504 , h e , at t h e term in ation of h i s office , addedt h e weight of h i s authority to t h e urgen t in stan ces of

Fr a Bar t olom m eo’

s frien ds , an d thus overcam e h i s

repugn an ce to pen cil an d palette . But first of all, Fr aBart olom m eo re solved so to provide for h i s brother , thatt h e man agem en t of h i s tem poral con cern s an d educationshould n ot in t erfere w ith h i s artistic works , or t h e dutiesof t h e Cloister, to wh i ch h e was scrupulously addicted.

As Pietro del Fattorin o evin ced som e talen t for pain tin g,

I See t h e A n n otation s to Vasar i’s Life of Fra Bar tolom m eo i n t h e editionof t h e C lassici di M ilan o, vol. vn .

3 If Fr a Bartolom m eo h ad ren oun ced pain tin g on accoun t of Savon arola’sdeath, an d resum ed i t i n ' 1 506, there m ust have been an in terval of eight.years, as Savon arola was m ur der ed May 2 3 , 1 49 8.


h e de t ermined that h e Should study t h e ar t underMariotto Alb er t in elli , an d that t h e latter should not onlyb e h i s brother’s master, b u t also t h e administrat or of h i sproperty . Fra Bartolom meo , therefore , summoned t h e

Prior of San Marco , San ti Pagn i n i , Mariotto Alb er t i n elli ,Biagio , father of Mariott o

, an d Pietro del Fattorino ,who , on t h e lst of January , 1 505 , signed a publicinstrumen t

,which contained t h e followi n g provi

S i on s z

Mariotto di Biagio , t h e paint er, i s to take charge ofPiero

,of Paul , (t h e agent) to teach h i m t h e ar t of

paintin g, an d all ki n ds of m azon er i a ,1 durin g six years ;

t h e first of which commences Jan uary lst , 1 505 , t h e

epoch of t h e contract, an d i s to last till January 1 st ,1 5 1 1 , without an y payment for said tim e .

Mariott o i s to b e t h e manager , con servator , allocator,

an d admin istrator of all t h e property i n herited by virt ueof t h e will of Paul, son of James, t h e agen t ; an d t h e

said propert y i s t h e followin g — a house situated in t h eparish of San Pier Gat t oli n i— a vin eyard i n San Donatoin Poggio

,with other pieces of arable groun d an d woods ,

situated in Val di Nieve— an d on e hundred an d elevenflor in s , at seven per cent. in t h e ban k of t h e Com mune ,of Floren ce .

Mariotto shall b e bound to keep said Piero in house ,to educa te , feed , an d clothe h i m ; an d in case t h e pupilshould ask h im for money, h e shall not b e obliged t o

give him more t han seven soldi per month .

Mariotto Ab er t i n elli i s bound to have t h e cfli ce of t h e

dead celebrated in t h e church of San Pier Gat toli n i , for

‘This word Mus on er ia is so m etim es used by Vasari i n refere n ce to

buildin g, just as t h e Fren ch em ploy t h e t erm b ut this i s t h e on ly exam pleI ca n fi n d of i t s bein g applied t o pai n tin g, gild iug, etc.

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S 3 1

t h e soul of Paul, t h e agen t ; an d h e i s t o give for thispurpose , as i s usual , two lire an d two poun ds of wax .

” 1.

On t h e part of Pietro , Fr a Bart olom m eo , after havin gobt ain ed t h e n ecessary faculties from h i s superiors , wasobliged to give Mariotto , for t h e six years , t h e ususfr uct usof t h e aforesaid property ; an d it was stipulated , m oreover, that i n case Piero should desire to le t t h e groun di n Val di Nieve , at t h e expiration of h i s appren ticeship ,h e could n ot hire it out to an y save Mariotto , at a justprice ; nor was h e em powered to sell it

,

to an y other thanMariotto, at a valuation agreed upon by four m en of thatdistrict.It was alsc

'

) provided , i n case Piero would not wish tolive with Mariotto Alb er t i n elli , an d com plete t h e term ofsix years, either because of per ver sen ess , or because h eh ad lear n ed very qui ckly, that h e (Piero) should giveMariotto such a sum ,

for said tim e,as m ight b e approved

of by t h e actual prior of San Marco . This was stipulatedthat Mariotto m ight n ot repent h im of t h e in struction sgiven t o h i s pupil.Fin ally

,Piero agreed that i n case h e died without

legitim at e or natural Children,withi n

,or after said Six

years, t h e in heritor of t h e vin eyard should b e obliged tosell it t o Mariotto

,or h i s heirs

, at a fair price ; an d thatMariotto should b e perfectly free to m ake t h e purchase ,or declin e it. Both parties then pledged them selves t osubmit t o t h e arbitration of t h e actual Prior of S . Marco .

2

Then follow t h e subscription s of Ser Niccolo di Bartolodi Liegi, San ti Pagn i n i , Fr a Bartolom m eo , Pier di Paolo ,

This would lead us t o believe that Fra Bar t olom m eo’

s father died i nFloren ce

,an d was buried in sa id church.

3 This arran gem en t seem s to have been t h e -

safest for Piero’s property

3 2 MEMOIRS‘

or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

Mariott o Alb er t i n elli , an d of Biagio , father ofMariotto .

‘

It i s not my provin ce to examine whether thesecondition s were hon ourable or otherwise ; an d I willmerely observe , that it appears stran ge that Fr a Bartolom m eo an d Santi Pagn i n i would have con fided Piero

’

s

education , an d t h e man agemen t of h i s prope rty , toAlb er t i n elli , whom they both kn ew to b e a dissipatedm an . It m ay b e that Biagio , t h e father of Mariotto

,

charged him self with t h e care of Piero’s tem poral affairs .

Nevertheless, I can n ot beli eve that t h e safety of t h e

youth was sufficien tly guaran teed .

I will make two other reflection s, which naturallypresen t them selves to t h e readers of this con trac t. In

t h e first place , t h e very act of con fidi n g h is brother t oAlb er t in elli , would almost persuade us that Fr a Bartolom m eo h ad made up h i s m in d n ever again to resumepen cil or palette , as , otherwise , h e would have super i n

tended t h e pictorial education of Piero , as h e di d that ofmany othe rs , lay-m en as well as religious. This doubtwould almost am oun t to certain ty , were we to placeimplicit reliance on Vasari , who stat es that t h e first workexecuted by Porta, aft er h e h ad taken t h e Dom in icanhabit

,was t h e painting of S . Bern ard , for t h e church

of t h e Floren tine Abbey , sin ce we have authen ti c docum ents to prove that that pain tin g was fin ished i n 1 506,or at t h e begin n ing of 1 507 ; but n ot i n 1 504 , or 1 505 ,as Vasari would have us to believe . In t h e secondplace , Lan zi h as erred when h e stated that Raffaelloreceived in struction i n colourin g from Fr a Bartolomm eo

,

at t h e period of h i s first visit to Florence , in 1 504 ; sin ce

V. Docum en t.


Bartolomm eo was then i n h i s con ven t, exclusively cecupied with h i s atte n tion to t h e re ligious services, an d tot h e dut ies imposed by t h e rule of h i s Order , althoughfrequen tly entreated by t h e Prior , as we ll as by h i s own

dearest fr ien ds, t o com m en ce some work i n pain ting .

Four years h ad now passed sin ce h e h ad refus ed toexecute an y labours of that kin d , but on t h e occasion wear e n ow describin g , bein g pressed by t h e i m portunitiesof Bernardo del Bian co , h e was prevailed on to begin t h epicture of S . Bern ard . Th e Sain t i s represen t ed as

writing,whe n t h e Virgin appears to h im , holdin g t h e

Divin e Child i n h er arm s, an d born e by n umerous figuresof children an d an ge ls , all paint ed by t h e master wi thexceeding de licacy . Beholdin g this appearan ce , S . Ber

nard i s lost i n adorin g con tem plation , an d there i s a

certain inexpressible ra di an ce of look , which i s, so toSpeak, celestial , i n h i s count enan ce , an d wh i ch seem s, toh im who considers t h e pictur e attentively , to becom e

di ffused over t h e whole work . There i s besides an archabove this pain t ing whi ch i s executed in fresco

, an d i s

also finished with extraor din ary zeal an d care .

” 1 We

deem it our duty to speak of th i s work somewhatcopiously.

Le t t h e reader imagin e Porta dom iciled i n thatsplen did gallery , (which h i s con frere , Fr a Giovann i A n

gelico , h ad frescoed in t h e conven t of San Marco , at t h e

beginn in g of t h e precedin g cen tury ,) with soul an d heartteem in g with t h e sublime theories of supernatural beautypropounded by Gerolam o Savon arola, an d charged topourtray t h e heavenly vision of t h e Abbot of Clairvaux .

Vasari ’s Life of Fra Bartolom m eo, tran slated by Mrs . Jon athan Foster.Th e arch alluded to n o lon ger exists, as i t was destroyed when t h e Churchwas m odern ized.


It i s easy to suppose that h e deeply meditated t h e

Coronation of t h e Virgin , by t h e An gelico ; an d that h ederived in spirat ion from these beautiful im ages (revealedt o Fr aGiovan n i in an ecstacy of love ,) when h e un dertookto depict t h e apparition of t h e Virgin to t h e m ost ten deran d devout of h er worshippers. Exquisite beyon d descr iption i s thi s composition by our friar. Un der a portico

,com

man din g a prospect of a rich an d luxurian t champaign,

that form s t h e ground of t h e pain tin g, we behold t h e

holy Abbot prostrate .

He,whom Mary’s charm s

Em b ellish’d,as t h e sun t h e m orn in g star."

On a desk, an d scatte red over t h e floor ar e t h e variousvolumes which were di ctat ed by t h e?glowin g love of t h e

m ellifluous Doctor ; an d if there b e an y on e insen satee n ough to gain say this predi cate , conceded by m an y a

bygon e age t o Bernard, let h im peruse these goldenworks, an d h e m ust taste t h e sweetness of paradise . Th e

re cluse i s actually em ployed i n writin g t h e praises of

Mary, at t h e very m om en t when you behold h er descen d

i n g on a tran slucen t cloud, with t h e In f an t Jesus, an d a

choir of An gels to beatify t h e holy con templative ; an d

h e , ecst aci sed by t h e Vision , with han ds upraised an d

gestures such as speak a father’s love ,”an d coun tenan ce

whereon a holy j oy i s diffused , seem s to pron ounce thateverlastin g strain which Dan te ascri b es to h i s lips i n t h e

th i rty-third Canto of t h e Par adi se

0 Virgin m other,daughter of thy Son !

Created bein gs all i n lowl in essSurpassin g, as i n height above thei n all ;

Term by t h e etern al coun sel pr e-ordain ed, ” e t c.

Oh ! what consumin g love an d divine ecstacy radiate

Dan te, Par adise, can t o xxxu. Cary’s Tran s.


from t h e figure of t h e sain t ! Surely none b ut t h e An ge licocould have depicted aught like this 1 ‘ Behin d t h e holyabbot h e placed S . Ben edict an d t h e Evan gelist S . John ,who exhibit com placen cy at this favour gran ted by t h eVi rgin to t h e greatest hero of t h e middle ages . All thesefigures ar e well design ed an d coloured ; an d nothi n g 0surpass t h e ease an d grace of t h e Virgin’s descen t, whichi s reple t e with m ajesty an d un con strained dign ity .

” I

will n ot characterise t h e figures of t h e Mother an d Sonas elegan t , Sin ce they have been bette r depicted i n otherworks ; b u t t h e an gels w h o surround them m i ght b esupposed to have been by an in ferior han d , as far as

outlin e an d colour in g ar e con cerned . There ar e few

pain tin gs by Fr a Bartolom m eo i n which h e h as n ot introduced beauteous an ge ls , som e soun di n g lutes , som e supportin g t h e draperies of t h e Madon n a’s th ron e , an d otherssurroun di n g t h e Etern al , all of which ar e won derfi i l forcorrectn ess of design ,

freshn ess of colourin g , an d beautyof form ; but these , i n this picture , in m y opin ion ,

don ot possess a sin gle on e of these graces. Some pr esum ptucus Van dal h as so in jured this picture by r e t ouch i n gs ,

that it alm ost m akes on e weep t o behold it. Th e figureof S . Bernard , which alone escaped th i s barbarism , establishes Porta’s claim to em inen ce i n ar t . Le t us observe ,m oreover , that after t h e in t erruption of six years ormore , we ar e not to m arvel if h i s hand failed to em bodyall t h e gr aceful conception s of h i s soul.

3

1 In t h e fresco of t h e Cor on a t i on by t h e An gelico in S . Mark’s, there are

som e Sain t s, t h e expression of whose heads resem bles that of Porta ’s S.

Ber n ard .In t h e Gallery of t h e Floren tin e Academ y there i s a pain tin g by an un

kn own han d, m arked No. vi i i , attributed t o Giot t i n o. Th e Virgin appeari n gto t h e Sa i n t between t wo An gels i s of m arvellous beauty. But t h e featuresof S . Bern a rd evi n ce l ittle or n o em otion .

3 Th is pai n t i n g is n ow i n t h e Floren ti n e Academ y. Th e abbey-church


This pain t in g occasioned a long an d vexatious controver sy. Bernardo del Bianco , when chargin g Fr a Bart olom m eo with i t s execution , did n ot stipulate an y fixedprice , but sim ply agreed that if an y question arose as t o

t h e value of t h e work , two com m on frien ds should b eappoin ted to arbitrate on what it was worth . When t h ework was fin ished, Fr a Bartolom m eo demanded twohun dr ed ducats , of which h e h ad already rece ived fortyfor expen ses in curred. Bernardo

,who was n ot in clin ed

to give more than eighty ducats , regarded this dem an das exorbitan t . Th e pain te r then expressed him self satisfied with a hun dr ed an d sixty , but even thi s appeared toBern ardo del Bian co to b e excessive . At len gth t h e

abbot,Loren zo di Credi , Mariotto Alb er t i n elli , an d other

fr ien ds of both parties in terfered , but all i n vain , as

n either Fr a Bar tolom m eo n or Bern ardo could b e broughtto an am icable arran gemen t. Th e question was then sub

m i t t ed to t h e Apothecaries who , at that period , were t h eumpires in all such differen ces.

1 But as t h e religiousdid n o t re lish t h e idea of goin g before a secular tribunal ,they gladly em braced t h e proposal of Fran cesco Magalotti , a re lative of Bern ardo del Bian co , an d at t h e sam e

tim e a fr ien d of t h e Fathers of San Marco , who un dertook to settle t h e dispute ; whereon , t h e litigan t partiesagreed to subm it to h i s arbitration . Magalot t i havin g

retain s an other picture on t h e sam e subject, b eli eved to b e by Fr a Fili ppoLippi .

In Floren ce, as well as i n m an y other ci ties,t h e Arts were un ited i n

Corporation s, an d were di vided in to Major an d M in or. Th e form er wereseven , an d t h e latter fourteen . Th e Apothecaries, Doctor s, an d Pai n tersform ed on e Corporation (of t h e Major Arts) . Each of these Corporation sh ad i t s own Con sul an d Gon falon ier. In 1 57 1 , t h e Gran d Duke Cosim o t h eFirst allowed t h e Pai n ter s to separate from t h e Apothecaries. Gaye, Carteggio. In ed. v. 2

,p . 3 9 .


valued t h e work at on e hundred ducats, an en d was putto th i s vexatious procedure , July 1 7 ,From t h e mom en t Baccio left Cosim o Rosselli , h eresolved t o take Lionardo da Vin ci for h i s model , an dthis will account for t h e exqui site tact of our artist.Havin g n ow de termined to modi fy h i s style an d man n er ,h e applied hi m self with intensest diligen ce to t h e studyof that grand exemplar.Tim e , wh i ch h ad substit uted t h e pure an d simpleimitati on of t h e true for t h e tradition al ar t of t h e

Giottesque , h ad also very frequently witn essed t h e sacr ifice of grace an d decorum to mere n aturalism . So muchso , that very few seem to have observed how natur e proceeds by t h e m ost varied modes to t h e conception of t h ebeautiful ; an d that it does n ot lim i t them arbitrarily toa single obj ect , but wis ely di vides an d di ffuses them overmany ; hen ce , it is n ecessary to select an d assim ilate suchas best harm on i ze together . Th e cultivator, therefore ,of t h e fin e arts , should im itate t h e industrious b ee , whichextracts from t h e various flowers of t h e fie ld , t h esubstan ce that it di stils in to hon ey . I will n ot den ythat t h e greate r part of t h e pain ters of t h e Florentin eschool , i n t h e fifteen th century, did study nature ;but if we except very few , it seem s t o m e that t h egenerality of them rarely attained to t h e beau t iful an d

graceful .2 This , in my Opin ion , i s to b e accoun ted for

by t h e m odels which th ey Se t before them , which weren ot taken from t h e gen teel an d noble classes of t h ecitizen s, but from t h e purlieus an d high-ways. Lionardoda Vin ci was t h e first who , so to say, with an exquisite

1 V. Docum en t.To this category belon gs A n dr ea del Castagn o, ( t h e m urderer,) Cosim o

Rosselli, An drea del Verrocchi o an d Pollaiuolo. How m uch were they n otexcelled by Fran cis, Per ugin o, an d Pi n turicchio !


sense of t h e beautiful, began to cull t h e choicest flowersof nature , an d thus realise t h e beau—ideal . To elegan cean d harm ony of figure , Lionardo wedded t h e harm on yof colour in g , an d t h e scien ce of Chiaroscuro , of which h ewas a con sum mate m aster , as h e was also of physical an dnat ur al scien ces .

When Fr a Bartolommeo di San Marco resumed h i spen cil , Vin ci h ad fled from Milan ,

which was de liveredfr om t h e tyran n y of Lodovico Sforza , by t h e arms ofLouis XII . He foun d a refuge i n Floren ce , an d t h e

Gon falon ier , Pier Soder in i , h ad j ust invited Michelan gioloBuon ar ot t i to that city ; or , we should rather say, ar en a,whereon these two great m asters, than whom greaterhave n ot been , or m ay n ot arise again , were destin ed toleave t h e im press of their alm ost super-hum an gen ius .

Vin ci’s arrival afl’

or ded Fr a Bartolom m eo great oppor tun i t i es ; an d it i s easy to suppose how quickly h e

formed t h e fr ie n dship of t h e pain ter of Th e Supper ,”

an d how eagerly h e applied him self to h i s direction s an dprecepts i n t h e theories of Chiar oscuro an d colourin g .

To give , as it were , a specim en of t h e Leon ardesquestyle , h e made an experimen t i n fresco for h i s con ven tof San Marco . Within a little arch , over t h e door oft h e sm all refect ory , h e pain t ed , i n half fig ures of t h e

n atural size , Jesus Christ Risen , an d in vited to partakeof t h e hospitality of t h e Disciples

[in t h e castle of Em aus .

Here we fi n d such eviden ce of i n ei’

s m anner , an d sucha happy im itation of that sovereign master , that weah n ost fan cy that Lion ar do’s han d h ad outlin ed an d

coloured these three beautiful figures . In fact , t h e headof our Lord , which Bartolommeo painted i n profile , i s son oble an d exquisite , an d t h e other two ar e so life-like ,that non e of t h e other Florentin e pain ters of t h e periodso n early approached Lionardo . It grieves m e to thin k


that this work of Perta h as been ignored by t h e gen er ali ty of writers an d ar t ists, although i n a very con spi

cuous place . In stead of writin g of, or studying otherworks by h im far in ferior t o this, they should have givenit a place am on gst h is chiefest production s . With t h e

exception of Vasari , who barely m en tion s it amongstt h e last works of t h e Friar , Lanzi , Rosini , Ri o , an d

others scarcely seem to have thought it worth notice .

That it should b e en um erated am on gst h i s production sof this period , an d whe n Lionardo was i n Floren ce , i sdeducible from t h e fact of h i s havin g in troduced t h eportrait of Father Niccolo Scom b erg, if Vasari says whati s true : it i s t h e first figure (in profile) , on t h e right,with t h e full an d florid counten an ce . This youn gGerm an h ad succeeded Father San ti Pagn i n i in t h e

Priorate of San Mar co , Jun e , 1 506 ; an d i n t h e yearfollowin g , havin g been elected Procurator-General oft h e Order , h e set ou t for Rome , where h e was con secratedArchbishop of Capua , an d rai sed t o t h e Cardi n alitialdi gnity .

1 I th i n k that t h e ot her Disciple i n that frescoh e of m aturer age— i s t h e portrait of Pagn i n i . Havin gfrequently asked myse lf which of Fr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s

pictures could have so charmed Raffaello as t o cause h imt o take Perta for a model i n h i s secon d man n er, thisalone , i n my judgm en t , deserved that high honour.Mean while , t h e rivalry whi ch Pier Sederin i m ay b e

Said t o have created between Michelan giolo an d Li e

narde da Vinci was destin ed to produce t h e happiestresult s t o their comm on coun try , an d t o reflect glory on

them b ot h . All t h e lovers an d cultivators of t h e Fin e

1 An n al. S. Marc i. Vasari's L ife of Fra Bar tel. He also f rescod an ar chover t h e guest—house of S. Mar co, an d i n this h e pain ted Christ, with C leoph as an d Luke, an d h e also pai n ted t h e portrait of Fr a N iccolo della Magus ,

wh o was afterwards Ar chbishop of Capua an d Cardin al.

42 MEMOIRS e s EMINENT PAINTERS,

art ists , abandoned t h e painting on wh i ch h e was engaged ,an d se t out for Floren ce to wit ness t h e -powers ofMichelangiolo an d Lion ardo . We fully agree with FatherLuigi Pun gileon i , who dat es this second visit of Raffaelloto Floren ce i nIt was i n t h e month of October that Sanzio arrivedin Florence . He gazed with aston ishmen t on t h e

cartoon s of these two gran d masters, an d, n ever t ired oflearn in g, h e in itiated h i s fi i en ds h ip wi th Rodolfo delGhi rlan daj o , Ari stotile di San Gallo , an d a still m orein timate union with Fr a Bartolom m eo di San Marco .

“ Fr a Bartolommeo was then enterin g h i s thirty-eighthyear , an d t h e Paint er of Urbin o , h i s twenty-fourth .

”22

When on e th i n ks of t h e first greetin gs of these two

gr eat souls, destin ed to fill t h e world with their fame ,an d to give such exam ples of virtue t o post erity, poorhuman n ature h as jus t cause t o grow proud. An d

,i s it

possible,that with such n ob le preceden ts before them ,

m en of gen i us should b e found to call t o their aid t h e

eff ect s of t h e vi lest passion s , in order t o degrade oursouls ? As long as h i story shall preserve to us t h e namesof Socrates, Cice ro , Trajan , Raffaello , an d Washin gton ,

a voice shall peal out from t h e inn erm ost recesses of ourcon s ciences , cryin g , shame upon them .

”3 We regard thisepisode t o b e so glorious for t h e painter of San Marco , an d

It would b e tedious to exam in e all t h e discr epan cies of historian s r especti n g this vis it of Raffaello to Floren ce. Pun gileon i , with whom Rosin i agrees,says i t t ook plac e i n 1 506 b ut m an y doubt whether itwas h i s first or secon dvisit. Others w ould have us believe that h e visited t h e city thr ice ; an dPun gileon i does n ot den y i t . I have elsewher e sa id that Vas ari dates t h ecom m en cem en t of Porta’s i n tim acy with Ra ffaello on h i s secon d vi sit ; b uth e con tradicts him self i n t h e Li fe of Fr a Bartolom m eo.

2 Pun gi leon i , Elogie di, Raffaello.3 Rosin i

,Storia della Pitt.

scur r r oas , AND ARCHITECTS . 43

so importan t for t h e hi story of Ar t , that we mus t needsspeak of it at some len gth .

When Raffaello arrived on Ar no’s beaut eous ban ks, iti s probable that Lion ar do an d Michelan giolo h ad alreadytaken the ir departure , an d that i n their absen ce , Fr a Bart olom m eo was t h e s tar of t h e Flor en t i n e sch ool.1

Mari otto Alb er t i n elli an d Ridolfo del Ghirlan dajo who,

in colouring, so n early approach Fr a Bartolom meo

,that

they almost deceive t h e most educated eye , h ad bothlearned from h im this chiefest elem en t of pain tin g ; an dof this Vasari i s a witn ess . Bu t to colour in g , Fr aBartolom m eo added a gran di ose style , an d a study of

Chiaroscuro , i n wh i ch h e was surpassed by n on e of t h eFlor en t i n es , save Lion ardo . This h as in duced Rosini t oaffir m that if t h e Friar of San Marco di d n ot excel Vin cian d Buon ar ot t i , h e certain ly cam e very near them .

2

To all th i s, I would add,that in colourin g

,h e m ay b e

compared to them both ; an d Sanzio him self, seem s t o

have th ought so. Hen ce , it was that h e selectedPorta for h i s model , an d sought h i s counsel an d guidan ce ; an d as t h e Friar was equally modest , h e requestedRaffaello to in doctrin ate him in t h e theories of perspect ive .

3 Where will you fin d master an d di sciple li kethese

1 Rosi n i,Storia della Pitt. 2 Rosi n i , Ib id.

3 This fact, n arrated b yVasar i , h as been adm itted by all historian s of Ar t ;n or was i t preterm itted by Pun gioleon i . I will barely observe that Vasaricon tradicts him self ; for , after statin g that Raffaello, at t h e tim e of h i s secon dvis it to Floren ce, taught Fr a Barte l. perspective, an d that t h e for m er learn edcolouri n g from h i m ; h e writes Rafl

'

aello h ad opportun ity for im provin g i nperspective, than ks to t h e fr ien dship whi ch b e con tracted w ith Fr a Bartol.della Porta in As to t h e rest

,M. Quat r em er e de Quin cy does n ot

hesitate to assert, that Ra ffaello was in debted to Fr a Barto! . for t h e m odifi

cation i n pen ci llin g an d colourin g that distin guishes h i s secon d m an n er. V.

Life an d Works of Rafi ‘

aello by De Qui n cy.

44 m n mom s or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

Oft en as I pace these solitary cloist ers of t h e conventof San Marco , I fancy that I behold Raffaello ecstaticallycontemplatin g t h e celestial pain tin gs of t h e Ange lico ,an d m y im agination evokes Fr a Bartolom meo dellaPorta, Fr a Paolin o di Pi st oja, Fr a Eustachio , Fr a Ben ede tto , t h e m in iaturist, an d Fr a Am brogio della Robbia ,all of whom ar e grouped roun d h im of Urbin o . Me

thin ks I hear Raffaello askin g Porta Do you thinkwe shall ever equal t h e di vin e ecstacy of that truly An

gelie Pain ter My fan tasy then represen ts Fr a Bart olom m eo buried in profoun d silen ce , as though h edespaired of such a result ; whilst Raffae llo

’

s flashin g eye

seems t o say, Gen ius like mine cann ot shrink from t h e

trial .” Reflection s such as these affect m e to t h e very

Rafi‘

aello’

s soj ourn i n Floren ce,that probably laste d

from t h e e n d of 1 506 to 1 508, does n ot exclude a briefvi sit that h e paid to Urbin o in t h e Sprin g or Sum m er of

On h i s return t o Floren ce , aft er em bracin g t h eFriar

,it would appear that they both se t about produc

ing some work i n wh i ch Fr a Bartolomm eo im itated t h e

Th is fri en dshi p between Ra ffaello an d Bar t el. i s t h e subject of a pai n ti n gby Vin cen zo Chialli, n ow i n t h e possess ion of Vi n cen zo Ser m olli . He

r epresen t ed these two person ages un der a portico on t h e groun d floor of t h econ ven t. From a door i n t h e back groun d we see t h e s t udio of Fr a Bartolom m eo

, an d on a bracket t h e wooden figure used by pai n ters for t h e arran gem en t of drapery, by which Chiall i gives us to un derstan d that we are

i n debted for this i n ven tion to Fr a Bartolom m eo. Th e latter h as j ust takenRa ff aello’s han d reveren tially an d aff ection ately, an d seem s to con duct h imin to h i s studio. On t h e sam e lin e, on t h e right, is Paul of Pis toja ( t h e fli erof this n am e) an able pai n t er, an d disci ple of Fr a Bartol.

, wh o ceases topolish a piece of porphyry, on which t h e colour s were prepared, a n d cap i n

han d, gazes tim idly an d respec t ft on t h e great m an,whom all saluted as

t h e Pri n ce of Pai n t ers. Dragom an n i, V. e. Op, di Vin cen zo Chialli, Floren ce,1 84 1 .

scur r r oas , AND ARCHITECTS . 45

grace of t h e Ur b in ese , an d t h e latter t h e style of t h eFriar’s colourin g . This, however , i s a con j ecture , whichwe pronoun ce with great tim idity , leavin g such an im

portan t subj ect to b e discussed by those who ar e moredeeply read i n Ar t -History . Nevertheless , we shall soonsee Raff aello , i n t h e m eridi an of h i s glory, takin g up h i sclassic pen cil to fin i sh a work which Porta h ad left imperfect at Rom e ; an d allowin g Ridolfo del Ghir landaj ot o

'

t i n t t h e drapery of h i s Vergi n e del Balda cc/zi n o i n

Floren ce . What won der , then , if what we have statedoccurred at a period when these two m asters were impartin g in structi on to each other ? In t h e description oft h e pain tin gs i n t h e gallery of M . D’ Abiel , min ist er oft h e Han seatic cities , published i n Paris , in 1 82 4 , there i sm en tion of an oval picture , four feet i n diameter, withthree quarter figures, represen ti n g S . Fran cis betweentwo an gels , kneelin g before t h e Virgin , who h as t h eDivin e In fan t on h er kn ees ; an d a th i rd angel kn eelin gwith a li ttle S . John , who presen ts som e fruits to t h eIn fan t . Th is work belon ged to t h e collection of Cardin al Bon zi , who brought it to Fran ce i n 1 67 1 ; an d it i ssaid to have been com m en ced by Fr a Bartolom m eo , an d

fin ished by Raffaello , afte r t h e death of t h e form er .‘

Now, as Raffaello never came to Florence aft er Porta’s

death , an d as Porta’s soj ourn i n Rom e was very brief, itappears to m e

, that if they both worked at this picture ,it m ust have been i n Floren ce durin g San zio’s second orthird visit .An illustrious artist , Coun t Carlo della Porta, assur es

m e that h e saw i n Milan ,i n t h e m an sion of t h e Fum a

galli family , a little t rypt ich , on e half of which i s

1 De Qui n cy. This Madon n a is called del Cappuccin o.

46 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTER S,

t hought to have been pain ted by Raffaello, an d t h e other

by Fr a Bart olomm eo . In t h e cen tre i s t h e B . V . ,with

h er Son in h er arms, an d in side of t h e little doors ar e

t wo Saints ; an d on t h e outside,S . Catherin e an d S .

Barbara. In t h e Virgin ,h e says , h e can recogn i se t h e

hand of Fr a Bartolomm eo, an d Raffaello

’

s i n t h e otherfour figures. During t h e tim e of this friendship betweent h e Ur b i n ese an d Fr a Bartolom m eo

,Vasari says that t h e

latter execut ed, i n San Marco,Floren ce , “

a pain tin gwith an in fin ity of figureswhich i s n ow in t h e possession oft h e king of Fran ce .

” 1 To this we m ight add som e otherpain tin gs, of which t h e sam e historian speaks i n t h e followin g terms : He executed som e pain tin gs for John ,

Cardin al de ’ Medi ci, (afterwards Leo an d h e pain t ed

for Agnolo Don i a Madon n a of extraordin ary beauty,which i s now t h e altar-piece of h i s chapel .”2 Monsign orBottari stat es that th i s picture passed in to t h e gallery of

Cardi n al Corsin i ; an d Lan zi says that there i s i n t h e

Corsini gallery at Rome a Holy Fam ily by Fr a Barto

1 Massell i says thatthi s picture i s i n t h e R. Museum , (Par is,) together w ithan other by t h e sam e pai n ter, which represen ts t h e Virgin on a thr on e i n t h em idst of various sa in ts, like t h e precedi n g ; b ut t h e first h as S . Catheri n er eceivin g t h e ri n g from t h e In fa n t Jesus ; an d t h e secon d represen ts t h eAr chan gel Gabri el i n t h e ai r , in t h e act of descen din g to perform h i s sublim e

m i ss ion : t h e date of this la st work is 1 5 1 5 . There i s an im portan t m em oirof t h e first picture in t h e archi ves of San Mar co, which tells us that it wasbought by t h e Floren tin e Republic, as a gift for t h e Fren ch Am bassador

,i n

1 5 1 2 ; an d that Fr a Bar t el. received 2 00 ducats for it. This n otice h as b eenextr acted from t h e ori gin al catalogue of Porta’s works, written by t h e syn dicof sai d con ven t. We wi ll give it in i t s en tirety at t h e en d of t h e life of thispain ter.2 This picture for Cardi n al de’ Medici, is m en tion ed thus i n sai d catalogue

“ Item,a pictur e of about two braccia, i n which there is a Nativi ty, an d

an gels, an d a la n dscape, value 50 ducats, given to Car di n al de’ Med ici, n owPope X. It was presen ted to h i m by t h e prior an d fathers.”

scur r r es s , AND ARCHITECTS . 47

lom m eo , which m ay b e regarded as t h e m ost graceful ofall h i s works i n this style .

1 In this there ar e m an ifesteviden ces of t h e elegance of Raffaello . R i o thin ks thath e can t race a marked resem blan ce of style between thesetwo painters in t h e Holy Fami ly belon gin g t o Cardin alFesch .

2

But,if t h e Fr iar of San Marco studied t o collect t h e

choicest an d most fragran t flowers of San zio , t h e latteraban don ed som e rem nan ts of that cruden ess that charact er i sed h i s first m an n er— thus im itatin g Perta i n t h e

large an d gran diose style,as well as i n t h e vigour an d

blen di n g of h i s colouring . That pain tin g of Raffaello’s ,which

,i n m y judgm ent

, exhibits decided im itation of t h eFriar

,i s t h e Madon n a of t h e Baldacchin o , n ew i n t h e Pitti

Gallery . Th e tr ait s of this resem blan ce to Fr a Bartelom m eo

’

s style ar e discern ible not on ly i n t h e com position ,

but also i n t h e tintin g an d drapery of t h e robes ; not tospeak of t h e figure of S . Pe ter , an d that of t h e Infan tJesus , wh i ch seem t o have b e en designed b y h im . M

Rio , an d even many able Floren tin e artists , haverem arked th i s.

3

We wi ll here conclude t h e secon d per iod of Porta’scareer. It em braces on ly two years . It i s true th at itdid n ot produce m an y paintin gs

,but it sowed these

choicest seeds , wh i ch were soon t o germinate in t h e third

History of Pain ti ng,Fl . School

,Epoch 2 .

2 Poes ie C h r e t i en n e, ch ap. ix. , p. 3 75 .

3 Rio,loc. ci t , p. 3 77 . M. Rio rem arks that t h e gr eat fresco of t h e Cr u

cifixi on, with t h e four sa in ts i n S ien a, m ay have been executed by Fra

Bar t el. at thi s per iod of h i s in tim acy with Raffaello. M. Rio errs i n stati n gthat it is i n t h e church of S. Agosti n o

, as i t is i n t h e Cloister of t h e con ven tdel San te Spirito. Vasari says n othi n g of it. In Sien a it was always r egar ded as a very in ferior work of Porta ’s. Latter ly, however, Sig. Gaetan oMilan es i h as proved it to b e n ot Fra Bar t olom m eo

’

s producti on , b ut that oftwo di sciples of h i s, con cern i n g whom we will have occasion to speak.

48 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS,

period , t h e m ost perfect pain tin gs that ever came fromh is pencil . Weddin g t h e graces of Raffaello to t h esevere n obility of Lion ardo ; unitin g t o harm on y oftin ting t h e power of Ch i aroscuro , an d t h e n ob le theoriesof pe rspective , Fr a Bartolom meo collected together t h esparse elements of pain tin g , an d thus arrived at thatperfection wh i ch h as been attained by very few .

CHAPTER IV.

Fra Bartolom m eo goes t o Ven i ce—Th e Pain ti n gs h e un dertook to executei n that C ity— Hi s r eturn t o Floren ce—Artistic partn ershi p with MariottoAlb er t in elli— I t s Dissolution .

THOSE who write of t h e origin an d vicissitudes of ItalianArt

, ar e we n t to glorify that project of Lodovico Caracci ,who

, t o stay t h e ruin caused by t h e Bolognese school ,instead of restori n g an d elevatin g it t o splen dour ,leagued him self with h i s cousin s An n ibale an d Agest i n e

,an d im agin ed that t h e on ly way by which h e

could accom plish such a glorious ai m , was t o se t aboutcullin g t h e choicest beauties of Raffaello , Cor r eggi e ,Tizian o , An dr ea del Sarto , an d ot h er s ; fan cyin g thath e m ight thus gather together, an d

,as it were , con cen

trate i n a sin gle on e all t h e best characteristics of t h evarious Italian sch ools . In a wor d , that celebrated trium vi r at e sough t t o revive i n ar t t h e doctrines an d

exam ples of t h e Alexan dr in e philosophers , an d t o inven tan Ecclect ic sch ool of pain tin g som ewhat an alogous t ot h e philosophy sim ilarly designated. Every on e kn ows

how th i s project eventuat ed . I cannot commend Anni

50 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS

di d, would not have thought himself so remote fr omperfection as t o b e obliged to go in quest of n ew beautiesan d other novel accessories. Not thus , however, did t h e

good Friar argue ; for, hear in g that t h e Ven et ians werefamed for thei r vigour an d harmony of colourin g— that,i n this particular, they excelled all t h e pain t ers of t h e

age , h e began to thin k that, i f h e could superaddt o t h e Chiaroscuro of Vinci an d t h e elegan t forms of

Raffaello a greater warm th of h i s own pe n cilling, h em ust have bestowed on t h e school of Floren ce t h e only

grace which it needed . He therefore resolved t o se t

ou t for Ven i ce , an d , accompan ied by t h e syndic of

t h e con ven t of San Marco , h e reached t h e Queen ly cityof t h e Adriatic in t h e April of 1 508. Here it was h i sgood fortun e to mee t an ancient an d trusted fr i end , h isfellow-citizen ,

t h e celebrated sculptor, Bacc io da Mon t eLupo , who , flying from t h e tyran n y of t h e Arrabbiatian d t h e Medicean despots , h ad found an asylum undert h e Republi can Flag of Ve n ice . Oh ! who coulddescribe t h e greetin gs an d affection ate embraces of thesetwo illustrious Florentine art ists ! Baccio da Mon t e Lupeclasped in h is arms that Porta (wh o probably h ad foughtby h i s side withi n t h e besieged walls of S . Marco ,) n ow

clad in t h e humble habit an d seekin g consolation for h iswoun ded spirit in t h e silence of t h e Cloister ; an d Portapressed t o h is bosom ,

in a strange land , t h e friend whoh ad shared h is aff ections an d all t h e tri bulation s of thesedolorous years , an d who , worthy of a be tt er fortune , wasnow an exile in search of freedom an d repose l Thi s

Burlam acch i , Vita di Fr a Ger ol. Savon arola, p . 1 66 Whilst t h efi r e of persecuti on raged again st Father Gerolam o, m an y of h is followers wereobliged to leave Floren ce, am on gst whom was an em in en t sculptor n am edBar t elo da Mon te Lupo, wh o, wishin g to go to Ven ice, was detai n ed by aCan on in Bologn a, wh o caused h im to execute t h e Twelve Apostles i n relieve,

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S. 5 1

fact,unn oticed by Vasari , in my judgm ent th r ows light

o n them b ot h . Wh en Fr a Bartolom m eo reached Ven ice ,Giorgion e da Castel Fr an ce was educatin g Tizian o , an d

Sebastiano Lucian i, aft e rwards called del Piom be , t h etwo greatest colourists of that schoo l ; an d it i s easy tosuppose that Porta derived n ew instruction s i n t h e theeries of t h e Art fi om t h e paintin gs an d precepts of G i orgion e . Thus t h e Friar

,who i n Floren ce en j oyed t h e

reputation of bein g on e of t h e grandest colourists , an d

who h ad in struc t ed Raffae llo an d Ridolfo del Gh i r landaj o , i n h i s m atur e years di d n ot think it un worthy ofh i m to be come t h e disciple of Giorgion e . A grandexam ple , truly, an d i n many respects like t hat of Fr aAn ge lico , who , i n hale old age , set about studying t h eworks of youn g Masaccio .

When t h e Domin ican s of t h e convent of San Pi e t r o diMuran o learned that such an illustrious mem ber of theirin stitute h ad com e to t h e city of t h e Doges , they causedFather Bart olomm eo Dalzan o , t h e vicar of their con ven t ,to wait on Perta, an d beseech him to leave them somespecimen of h i s power i n ar t . Y i elding to the ir request,Fr a Bartolomm eo un dert ook t o pain t a pi ctur e on can

vas ,‘t h e value of which was to b e be tween seve

on e h undr ed ducats . At first they gave him threeducats to purchase t h e colours, an d an in stalmen t of

twe n ty-five more , to b e deduct ed from t h e value of t h ework , which was to b e determin ed by som e frien ds, just

a work so adm ir able,that all t h e city wen t out t o see it. This Bar t elo i s

still livin g, an d h e him self told m e this w ith h i s own m outh.” Here i s

an im portan t work by this fam ous sculptor, un n oticed byVasari .This is an allusion t o t h e m ethod which Fr a Bart. adopted for t h e pr e

servation of h is pictures. He was wen t t o spread can vas over t h e pan el,i n

order to preven t apertures an d fissures i n t h e weed. V. Vasari .


as h e h ad arranged wi th Be rnardo del Bianco in Flo~

r cn ce . These twen ty-eight ducats must have been disb urs ed partly by t h e sculptor Baccio da Monte Lupo ,

(we have n ot ascertained wha t understan ding m ay havebeen between them ,) an d part ly by Father BartolommeoDalzan o , who sold a volume of t h e letters of S . Catherin eof Sie n a, to procure ”

t h e money . Th e Records do notstat e that t h e subject of t h e picture was suggest ed t o

Porta. Not bein g able to m ake a lon g soj ourn i n Venice ,h e returned to Floren ce , whi lst Raffaello was still there ;an d h e im m ediately set about executin g that won derfulpain tin g of S . Catherin e an d S . Mary Magdalen e , whichi s now i n S . Rom an o di Lucca, an d which I regard as

t h e gran dest w ork of this celebrated pai nter.In t h e upper part of t h e pictur e , h e represented

t h e Ete rnal Father seat ed i n great maj esty on a cloud ,w it h His right hand i n t h e act of blessing t h e holywomen at His feet, an d holding i n His left an ope nvolume , whereon i s wri tt en : “ I am Alpha an d Omega,

”

thus to sign i fy that He was t h e begin n i n g an d en d of allthings . There is such divinity in th i s figure , that, onbeholdi n

'

g it, t h e soul i s filled with profoundest reveren ce ;an d no other could have given us a more stri king imageof “ Him of t h e e te rnal years ,

” described by John t h e

Evan gelist. Round t h e thron e i s a band of angels , twoof whom rain down a shower of flowers upon t h e holyan d en am our ed wom en . Oh , what beauteous an gels !How truly an d exquisitely coloured ! Let no on e fancythat h e can behold anyt hin g excelling them . Nothin gcan b e mor e charmin g than on e of them ,

who,havi n g

made h i s head a footstool for t h e feet of t h e Eternal ,raises with h i s ti n y hands a ve il , on which we read thesewords, that t h e pain ter took from a work attributed t o S .


Dionysius t h e Ar eepagi t e :“D ivi n usAm or ex tasim f aci t

thus m aintain in g t h e traditions an d t h e maxim s of Christian ar t , which availed itse lf of t h e Scriptur es an d t h e

Fathers t o elevate t h e min ds of t h e people to t h e con

t em plat i on of heaven ly thin gs. In t h e under part of t h epicture h e pain ted S . Mary Magdalene on t h e right , an don t h e left S . Catherin e ; b ot h rapt i n ecstacy, an d raisedfrom t h e ground by a ban d of cherubim s, wh o , seen

fr om a distan ce , present t h e form an d semblan ce of a whitetran slucen t cloud : this i s a characteristic so peculiar toPorta , that I have n ot discovered it i n an y other pain ter .Th e Seraphim of Sien a , t h e spotless maiden ,

rivets h ereyes on t h e Etern al Father, an d seem s t o b e in undatedby t h e glory of th e heavens, whose por t ak ar e open ed toh er . Th e movement of t h e arm s, of t h e coun t en an cean d whole person won derfully expresses t h e ecstacy o f

that e n am oured soul. Th e pen i ten t Magdalen e holds t h eaccustom ed vase , an d h as h er eyes bent down wards

, as

though sh e deem ed herse lf un worthy of gazin g on thatglory ; or better still, because sh e would fain raise h ersoul t o t h e con t em plation of t h e ce lestial an d im pe r i sh ab le , by m edi tatin g t h e fr agile an d sen sible object. An d

sh e truly shows that sh e i s absorbed i n t h e profoun destthought. Even t h e Angelico him self could n ot havepourtrayed more powerfully th i s divin e ecstacy an d

devout recollection . Th e lan dscape , f orm in g t h e groun dof t h e picture , i s also very adm irable , an d so ablyhandled, that it m ay bear com parison with t h e bestproduction s of t h e Ven e tian m asters ; a clear proof oft h e di ligen ce with which h e studied that school whoselands capes ar e t h e b eas t of Italy .

Thi s pain tin g clearly proves that Fr a Bartolom meo

“ D ivin e Love causeth Ecstacy .

” —De Divin is Nom in i b . lib. iv.

54 MEMOIRS or Er IINENT PAINTERS ,

possessed a warm imagination , a sweetn ess of pencilling ,an d a richn ess of types, whi ch can n ot b e surpassed i n an yother of h i s pr oductions. Here , every thi n g i s perfect,t h e design im pressive an d correct, t h e colourin g harmen ious

,t h e outlines well defined , t h e folds of t h e drapery

sim ple an d n atural ; whilst t h e grace an d beauty of t h efigur es so nearly approach Raffaello , that som e wouldhave us believe that this picture was design ed by San zio ,an d coloured by t h e Fr iar .

l Even though all t h e otherpain tin gs by Er a Bartolom meo should b e destroyed , thisalon e would b e sufficient to entitle him to a placeamon gst t h e most distin gui shed art i st s ; an d , in myjudgm en t , it i s h i s chef d

’

oeuvre . I am not, however,prepared to say,

that it m ay b e regarded an eclecticismof t h e Ve n etian , Rom an , an d Lom bard schools. I willfinally observe , that thi s work suffered m uch durin g threecen t uries, from t h e action of t h e sun , an d became so ari dan d discoloured that Professor Ridolfi says, “ it lookedas if it h ad n ot been painted i n oil , but i n tem pera ; so

much so , that no on e appreciated it .” Adm irablyrestored by Professor Nardi , it h as n ew resumed i t sancien t beauty .

This , like t h e painting h e executed for Bernardo delBianco , was t h e cause of litigation . As soon as it was

1 Ri o Poesie C h r et ien n e, ch . ix. p. 3 8 1 . This graceful writer,like Vasar i

,

h as erred i n stati n g that S. Catherin e, V.M. i s in troduced i n to thi s pai n tin g.Rum ohr relates that t h e origi n al des ign s of t h e two prin cipal an gels of t h epictur e, which ar e i n t h e Galler y of t h e Ufii zj , Floren ce, wer e for a lon gtim e attr ibuted to Lion ardo da Vi n ci, an d wer e on that accoun t placedam on g t h e ot h er design s by that celebrated m aster. On com pari n gthem with t h e origi n als, they wer e discovered to have been by Fra Bartolom m eo della Pe rta (Rio. loc. cit.) Th e cartoon s of on e part of t h e com positiou ar e n ew i n t h e Gallery of t h e Floren tin e Academ y, m arked 6

,8.


fi n ished , Fr a Bar t olom rn ee noti fied t h e religious of t h e

faé t ; but owin g to t h e war , (it was t h e period of t h e

League of Cam bray ,) an d t h e death of Bartolom m eoDalzan o , t h e Friars of t h e con vent of San Pietro (delMuran o) , gave themselves n o con cern about i t . Aft er abrief interval they sent two of their religious to Florenceto arrange t h e residue of t h e pri ce . Th e picture h ad beenvalued at m ore than on e hun dred ducats ; nevertheless,in consideration of t h e twenty-eight already rece ived,Porta declared himself satisfied with fifty m ore . Not

acceding t o this se t tlemen t, t h e two religious retur n edt o Murano , an d appeared n o more i n t h e tran saction . Att h e en d of about three years, t h e Fathers of San Marcosent a prot est to t h e conven t of San Pietr o , datedJanuar y 1 5 , 1 5 1 1 , i n whi ch they declared that , if aft e rt h e expir ation of t en days, they di d n ot take t h e picturean d disburse t h e balan ce , it should b e sold, an d t h e

twen ty-e ight ducats forfeited. As they returned n o

answer, t h e pictur e rem ain ed a con siderable while i nFlor en ce .

I Th e Registry of t h e conven t of San Marcostate s, that th i s work was given as a presen t to a fi i en dof t h e Order ; an d I doubt n ot that Father Pagn i n i , ofLucca , t h e bosom fri en d of Fr a Bar tolom m eo was t h eperson on whom it was best owed, an d that h e sub se

quen tly presen ted it to h i s own natal place . This wasn ot t h e on ly picture which Porta be st owed on Pagn i n i ,for t h e Registry, already quoted, gives us t o u n derstan dthat h e presen ted h im with two little pain tin gs. m ean tfor a book , represen tin g , on on e side , t h e Nativity , an don t h e other, t h e Cr ucifixion ,

t h e Virgin , an d St. John ,

whi ch were valued at sixteen ducats. Pagn i n i aft erwardsgave them to Mon sign or Zan obi G‘raddi .2

V. Docum en t.2 This sam e subject was pa in ted i n t h e sam e m an n er, a secon d tim e, by


Another mar vellous painting , in which all con n ois

seur s of ar t recogn i se a most happy im itation of t h eVen e t ian sch ool, i s t h e S . Vincent Fer rer ; a work thatpassed from t h e con ven t of San Marco to t h e gallery of

t h e Floren tin e Academ y . He ,

” write s Vasari , painteda figure i n oil over t h e door which leads into t h e sacristyof t h e conven t, t h e subject be ing San Vin cen zo , who wasa Monk of h i s own Order

,preachin g on t h e rigours of

t h e Divine j ustice . In t h e attitude of this figure , butsti ll more in t h e head , there i s all that st ern n ess an d

imposin g severity , usually manifest in t h e countenanceof t h e preacher who i s labouring t o induce m en , obstin atein their sin s, t o amen dm ent of life , by settin g beforethem t h e terrors of t h e justice of God ; n ot pa i n t ed , b ut

r eally i n life, does this adm irable figur e appear to h i mwho regards it atte n tively, so powerful i s t h e relief withwh i ch it i s executed, an d very much i s it to b e lamented ,that t h e pain tin g i s rapidly becomin g a rui n

,being

cracked all over fi om havin g been pain t ed with freshcolours, on a fresh gr oun d, as I have rem arked , respecting t h e works of Pietro Perugin o , painted in t h e

In gesuat i .”1 In fact, so won derfirl i s t h e managemen t of

Chiaroscuro an d colourin g in this work , that t h e figureseems about t o detach itse lf from t h e gr oun d of t h e

picture . Th e eff ect i s considerably heightened by a

niche , i n adm irable perspective , pain ted on t h e upperpart

,in a sem icircular shape , wh i ch form s t h e ground of

t h e picture ; an d t h e life-like figure of t h e Sai n t , seemsalmost to spri n g forth from t h e deep shadi n g. Monsign orBottari says that thi s work might easily pass for on e by

Fra Bar t el. He gave i t t o t h e Prior of S. Marco, F. Bartel. da Faen za, wh ogave i t t o h is brother. I t was valued at sixteen ducats !

Th e Dom in ican s of S ien a possess a l ittle copy on can vas, which seem s tohave b een executed by Fra Bartolom m eo, it is so adm irably colour ed.

58 MEMOIRS e s EMINENT PAINTERS,

t h e Epiphan y , i n 1 5 1 6 , an d dined with t h e reli gious ,adds that Th e meat s were cooked hard by t h e lavat oryan d hospice , whi ch i s n ear t h e studio .

” These words , Ifan cy, clearly in dicate t h e place i n wh i ch they cul t ivatedan d taught t h e art s . It was here that Fr a Bartolom meoeducat ed all these youths men tion ed by Vasari an d

Lan zi ; that i s Fr a Paolino da Pi stoja , Ben ede tt o C i anfan i n i

, Gabriele Rustici , an d Cecchin o del Frate .

1 To

t hese we will add Fr a Andrea, who took t h e Dom in icanhabit in 1 500, an d who i s described i n a volum e of

Miscellan i es , i n t h e conven tual archives , as occupiedi n assistin g Porta ; an d a Fr a Agostin o

, of whom we willspeak hereafter .2

This artistic part nership , whi ch h i s superiors allowedFr a Bartolom meo to form with Alb er t i n elli , m ay b e

described in a few words . Th e Syn dic of t h e con ventwas boun d to supply colours , can vas , an d t h e othern ecessaries, for t h e t wo pain ters, an d

,whensoever t h e

partn ership was dissolved , aft er deducting all expenses,t h e pain tings were t o b e sold , on e -half of whateverthey might brin g goin g t o Mariotto , an d t h e other t oPorta, or rather to h is con vent. Fr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s

vow of poverty not permittin g him to appropriate an ym onies resultin g from h i s labours , h e m ay b e said t o

have earn ed little else than t h e applause of h i s contem

perar i es.3 Aft er all that we have hithe rto said , I will

now answer a few quest ion s, which will naturallysuggest them selves to t h e reader. Were all t h e

'Vasar i, Life of Fra Bartel . i n fi n e. Lan zi, Floren tin e Sch ool, Secon dEpoch.Am on gst other en tr ies i n a book of Miscellan ea, 1 11 t h e archives of S.

Mar co, we fi n d, ad an n . 1 5 1 2 , March 2 0, “ three gold flor i n s to Fra A n drea,

t h e lay-brother, for gold used i n t h e pain tin gs.

”

3 Razzi, ( Storia degli Uom in i l llustri) , says that t h e pai n ters of t h e Orderwere exem pt from t h e duty of recitin g t h e D ivin e Ofii ce i n ch or e, an d that all

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECTS . 59

pain tings, during t h e period of th i s partn ership , e n tirelyexecuted by Fr a Bartolomm eo , or h ad Alb er t i n elli a

hand in them ? Were they all origin als ? Aft er havi n gatt en tively perused an an cien t docum en t, which shall b e

gi ven am on gst others hereaft er, we an swer, that all t h epaintin gs were design ed by Fr a Bartolom m eo ; thatMariotto coloured some of them , an d that Porta gavethem t h e fin al t ouches, an d t h e stam p of origin ality, justas Raffaello did when assist ed by Pe n n i , Giulio Rom ano ,an d others. Moreover, when ever Porta en tire ly design edan d colour ed an y work , h e was won t to in scribe it withh i s n am e , an d t h e year i n which it was produced. We

have two docum en ts regardi n g th i s artisti c partn ershi p ;t h e first of which relate s t o i t s dissolution

,an d t h e

division of all t h e pain tin gs an d n ecessaries. This is i nAlb er t i n elli

’

s han d-wri tin g. Th e secon d is t h e oftencited catalogue of Porta’s pictures, given to us byFat her Bartolommeo Cavalcan ti , Syn di c of t h e con ven tof San Marco . These docum en t s, con cordan t i n everyother respect, di ffer as regards on e of t h e m ost perfectpictures that ever cam e from t h e pen cil of t h e Friar .Thi s i s that m os t beau tiful work already described , i nwhich t h e Etern al Father blesses S . Catherin e an d S .

Mary Magdalen e , n ow i n San Rom an o di Lucca. Th e

Memoirs of t h e con ven t state that thi s pictur e was

fin i shed In a very sh or t t im e aft er Fra Bar tolom m eo h adretur n ed from Venice ; that rs t o say, in t h e Jun e , or July,of Th e partn ership , however, did n ot com m en cetill early i n t h e followin g year , when that picture was

e ither wholly or alm ost fin i shed . We have sai d that it was

t h e m on ey they earn ed wen t to t h e support of t h e con ven t. They wereallowed

,however, t o retain as m uch as was n ecessary for pur cb asin g colours,

e t c.

R icordan ze. ad an n . 1 5 1 1 .

60 MEMOIRS or EMINEN'I‘ PAINTERS ,

valued at nin ety ducats, an d that it i s numbered amon gs tt h e works presen ted as gift s . At t h e di ssolution of t h epartnership , however , t h e first mentioned i s that of Godt h e Father, with S . Cather in e , an d S . Mary Magdalene ,valued at sixty ducats

, an d recorded as belonging toFr a Bartolommeo . I thin k , however , that this was a

repetition of t h e former ; an d t h e di ff eren ce of t h e price ,as well as t h e tim e in which it was executed , m ay b e

t aken as an ar gum ent for this assertion . Nor should weforget that t h e Syn dic of t h e con ven t, i n h i s catalogueof som e pictur es pain ted by Er a Bar tolommeo , durin gh i s partn ership with Mariott o , does not men tion that ofLucca. We have thought it necessary t o say th i s much ,lest an y doubt m ight arise concerning t h e originality ofthat m ost splendid pain tin g.

Con tin uing to speak of these which were indubitablyproduced during t h e partn ership, we fi n d t h e reallygrand pi ctur e of t h e Virgin between two Sain ts , n ew int h e cathedral of Lucca. Nor do I hesitate t o affirm ,

thatthat city i s in debted t o Pagn i n i for this marvellous workby Porta. This pictur e i s men tion ed i n both t h e aforesaid documen ts ; an d t h e inscription ofFr a Bar t olom m ee

’

s

name , cert ifies to us that t h e design an d colouringwere entir ely h is own . In my Opin ion , it possessest h e gr acefirl nobility of Raffaello , an d t h e harmon ioustintin g of t h e Venetians. If we except t h e dimensions,it i s nowise in fer ior t o t h e other in San Rom ano , ofwhich we have spoken . Th e Marquis Antoni o Maz

zar osa published a description of it in a lett er,that h e addr essed to t h e celebrat ed Pietro Giordani ,an d we will avail ourselves of a few fragm en ts of h i sremarks .

There ar e seven figures , that i s to say, t h e Virgin ,wh o, with Jesus at h er breast, is seated on a pedestal in


t h e centr e ; two A n gels ar e over h er in t h e act of

crown in g h er ; S . Stephen i s on t h e right, an d S . Johni s on t h e left , standin g ; an d a little angel i s seated on

t h e st ep of t h e pedestal playin g a lute an d sin gin g.

“ Mary i s a beauteous maiden , about eighteen years ofage , an d h er fair face , chast e as a lily, evin ces t h e t ender est an d devoutest affection . Absorbed in t h e cont em plat ion of t h e In fant, whom sh e presses to h er

bosom with h er left ar m , n othin g di stract s h er from thatdear object, on wh ich sh e seem s t o feast h er eyes. Th e

beauteous Infan t, though playful , an d apparen tly i n di fferen t to all thin gs aroun d h i m ,

clearly shows that He i s

con scious ofHi s divinity, for a li vi n g light flashes fromHi s eyes , an d i n Hi s whole bearin g there i s a repose an d

conte n tm en t such as m ight b e fan cied to b e peculi ar tot h e Son of God , who i s beatitude itself. On e of t h e twonude an gels who suspen d t h e crown over t h e Virgin’shead , t h e on e on h e r left , i s poised i n t h e ai r , an d

seem s intent on h i s fii n ct i on ; whilst h i s com pan iondescen di n g a little , sustain s t h e crown with h i s left hand ,an d looks at S . Stephen ,

who i s un der h im , as though h ewere afraid to hurt him with h i s tin y feet. Each of

t hem holds in t h e han d n ot en gaged with t h e crown , asaffron -coloured ve il , which , drawn through their fin gers ,falls i n graceful folds , an dheight en s t h e beauty of t h e flyin gan gels , an d breaks t h e m ass of ai r about t h e coun ten anceof t h e Madon n a. S . St ephen i s represen ted as a youn g an ddelicate priest. Hi s face i s i n profile , an d h e ten derlycon t em plate s t h e incom prehen sible hum ility of t h e In fan tJesus . An d oh , how surpassin gly beautiful i s h i s ex

pression whilst h e h olds ou t t h e palm -bran ch— t h e em

blem of h i s m artyrdom— an d than ks t h e Divin e In fantfor havin g ch osen him to b e t h e foremost of t h e bleedingband ! S . John’s aspect is handsom e , but somewhat


em aciat ed— perhaps t h e pain ter h ad been thin king of t h eVoice cryin g in t h e wildern ess .

’

Hi s face i s almostentirely visible , an d i s infl am ed by that holy fir e thatin wardly con sum es him ,

whilst, h i s cavernous an d

flashi n g eyes reveal t h e in te n sity of t h e fi r e that burn sin h is soul. In h i s left hand h e carries t h e accustomedlon g, slen der cross , wh i le , with h is right, h e poi n t s t o t h eInfan t, wh o i s t h e obj ect of h i s profoun d m edi tations .

” Itremai n s for us to speak of t h e angel sittin g at t h e foot oft h e pedestal , who touches t h e lute wh i lst a celestial strainseems to flow from h is lips . Th e attitude of this dearcreat ure is beautiful : t h e left leg i s con tr acted an d t h e

right extended. He i s partly n ude an d partly clothedwith a little tunic , over which i s thrown a veil of finesttexture , that seem s almost to m ove . Like on e thoroughlymaster of h i s in strum en t, h i s eye i s not on it , while h es t rikes t h e strin g, an d, ravished in ecstacy, chan ts t h epraises of t h e Lord . It is utterly im possible to describethis as it deserves. Where every thin g i n this picturei s beautiful, this an gel i s t h e most beautiful of all.

Truly then m aywe exclaim withMazzar e sa, Oh,what a

beautiful picture i s thi s for un ity of thought,harmony of

composition , brilliancy an d variety of colourin g, for fi n eness of expression , for i t s dr aperies, for correctness of

design ,for relief - i n a word, for all that con stit ut es an

emin ent art ist. Here Porta h as shown himself n ot on lyworthy of t h e friendshi p of Raffaello , but worthy t o b e

h is rival .”1

It would appear, that t h e pain ter looked on thisworkas , in every respect, calculat ed to preserve h is mem ory ,

This picture h as been en graved by Sam uele jesi di Coreggio, an d m orerecen tly by t h e Saxon en graver, Maurice Stein le. A little des ign m ade byFra Bar t el. (with a pen ,) of t h e sam e subject, i s n ew i n t h e Gallery of t h eUfli zj i n Floren ce.


for h e inscribed h i s name on t h e step , on which t h eangel i s seated , playin g t h e lute . Fr am e Bar t h olof

m ei Flor en t i n i Or d i n is Pr tedi ca tor um , 1 509 . Vasarih as dismissed this picture , with a few words ; whereas,h e should have given it di stin guished m en tion .

All these works, h ad n ow shed such lustre on t h e

n ame of Fr a Bartolom meo , that Pier Sederin i Gon falon ier , of Floren ce , n ot bein g able to get Lionar do daVin ci or Michelan giolo , t o pain t t h e hall of t h e Council ,as t h e cartoon s h ad n ever been coloured , addressed h imself to our Friar, who was then t h e forem ost m an in t h ecity , beseech i n g h i m to decorate that august seat of t h echief magistracy . He , therefore , en gaged h i m to painta great picture— n ot represen tin g a battle , or an y pas

sage i n t h e profan e history of h i s coun try ; on t h e ce n

t r ary, selectin g a subject , con gen ial to t h e ideas of t h eFriar, h e charged h im t o paint t h e portraits of all t h eSain ted Protectors of Florence , doin g hom age to t h egreat Queen of Heaven . Though Vasari says , that thispicture was com m en ced i n t h e last days of Fr a Bartolom m eo , we have authen tic docum en ts to prove , thath e execut ed it at t h e pe riod of h i s partn ership wi thMariotto Alb e r t i n elli ; on e of these docum ents plain lystatin g at t h e time of their separation , that “

t h e greatpictur e for t h e hall of t h e Coun cil , design ed by t h e

hand of Fr a Bar tolomm eo , shall belon g t o t h e Fr i ar s .

”l

Father Girolam o Dan di Gin i i n t h e of t -quoted Re

gi st ryof t h e Con ven t of San Mar co , under date , Jun e 1 71 5 1 3 , ackn owledges to have rece ived on e hun dredducats from t h e Signory of Floren ce , on account of

said pictur e ; 2 which , if com m en ced in 1 5 1 2 , t h e epochof t h e di ssolution of ‘

t h e partnership , would lead us to

1 M iscellan ea, No. 2,Ice. cit. See Docum en t.


believe , that t h e Friar h ad been commissioned t o executeit about 1 5 1 1 , that i s, si x years before t h e period statedby Vasari ; but t h e hon or of decoratin g t h e great hallof t h e Coun cil , was re served for Vasari hi m self , whofrescoed it from ceili n g to pavemen t with histories. OfPorta ’s pictur e

, we will speak more copiously at t h e

conclusion of thi s life . But whosoever would investigat e , why Fr a Bartolom meo , aft er receivin g part of t h eprice of said picture , di d n o t pe rfect it durin g t h e six

years that h e sur vived, must find it di fficult to get a

satisfact ory answer.Th e other pai n tings , execut ed during t h e part nershipwith Alb er t i n elli , ar e t h e following -A Nativity, valuedat two ducats—A Chr i st, carryin g t h e Cross, of t h e

same value—An Annunciation , sold to t h e Gonfalonierof Florence , for six ducat s— A picture (subjectknown) , which i s described as

“ design ed by Fr aBartolomm eo , for t h e Certosa of Pavia

,like on e by

Filippo (perhaps, Filippo Lippi) , con cern in g which Ifind t h e followin g record , by t h e Syn di c of San Marco :“AD 1 5 1 1 , from our Fr a Bartolom meo an d Mariotto ,pain ters, July 3 , twe lve golden ducats , pai d by t h e

Certosa of Pavia, for paint in gs executed for that brotherh ood.

”In t h e m argin , I fi n d t h e cypher 3 4 : i t would

appear, that this picture was t h e work of them both ;that i s to say, Fr a Bartolom m e o designed , an d Mariottocoloured it. Susb equen t ly, there i s m en tion of a pictur e , which was removed to Flanders ; but though t h e

subject i s n ot told , i t s dim en sion s give us to un derstand ,th a t it was a work of great im portan ce . There ar e two

records of it : on e , dated 1 5 1 1 , in which t h e Syn dicacknowledges to have rece ived fi om Mr. Fer r i n , an

En glishman , twen ty ge ld ducats , paid in to t h e han ds of

Fr a Bartolom meo, bein g t h e h alf of forty ducat s, given to


tiful children pain ted b yPorta . Th e two figures of S .

Pe t er an d S . Paul , be tween whom t h e Virgin i s placed ,

ar e almost life-size ; an d , I would venture t o say, that asfar as design is con cerned, they surpass those which Portaexecuted in Rom e for Fr a Marian o Fetti . As I saw t h e

picture in a b ad light, I wi ll n ot speak of i ts colouri n g ;but, despite t h e injuries it sus tai n ed from t h e fi r e thatdst r oyed a great part of this church i n t h e seven teen thcen t ury, it appears to m e to b e robust an d harm onious ,t o say n othi n g of t h e reli ef, whi ch i s adm irable . Th e

embasemen t, on whi ch t h e Virgin i s seated , bears date1 5 1 1 . I thi n k that t h e followin g no t ice by t h e Syndi cof t h e conven t , relates to thi s work It i s dated October3 r d

, of t h e sam e year. From our Bar t olem ~

m eo an d h i s par t n er , Mar i e t t e, October 3 rd , seven gold

flor in s,be in g an in stalmen t of thi r ty ducats , wh i ch they

got for t h e picture at Pisa belonging to MicheleMast ian i .

” I am assur ed that t h e chapel in whichthis pictu re i s, belon ged t o t h e Mas t i an i family .

This seem s to have been t h e con j oi n t work of t h etwo partners. Th e secon d was als o con fided t o Fr a

Bart olom m eo , by Averardo Salviati ; an d it i s in all

probability t h e sam e that Vasari says was . executed byour fri ar i n h i s youth , aft er h e h ad left Cosimo Rosselli ,an d established h i mself in h i s own habi tation near t h eRoman Gate . It m ay b e , however, that h e painted a

simi lar on e for t h e same Salviati at this period . Th e on lyrecord of this occurs in t h e mem oranda of t h e Syndic

i

of

t h e convent.These ar e t h e prin cipal works executed by Fr a Barto

lom m eo durin g h i s partn ershi p with MariottoAlb er t i n elli ,whi ch partnership last ed about three years . Finally ,January 5 , 1 5 1 2 , aft er Santi Pagn i n i h ad been againelect ed Prior of t h e conven t of San Marco

,t h e partner

scurr r oas , AND ARCHITECT S . 67

ship was di ssolved, an d they proceeded to di vi de t h e

mon ies earned by their works, as well as t h e picturesthemselves, an d t h e other n ecessaries pertain in g to t h ear t . Aft er deducting all expenses, t h e two pain tersdi vided between them t h e sum of 42 4 ducats . Th e

painti ngs of wh i ch Fr a Bartolommeo retai n ed possession ,

ar e t h e following — A God t h e Father,with S . Catherine ,an d S. Mary Magdalen e— t h e great pict ure designed fort h e hall of t h e Council— an Annunciation ; a Ch r ist carryi n g t h e Cross ; a head of Our Lord , given by t h e

religious t o Lion ardo Bartolin i , together with some minorworks . Mariot ti Alb er t i n elli , who h ad dr awn t h e deed ofdissolution , retain ed a picture by Filippo , (probablyLippi) , over an d above t h e sum received for t h e copy of it ,executed for t h e Certosa of Pavia ; an d a little sketch byEr a Bart olom meo , represen tin g Adam an d Eve . Finally

,

Mariotto added t h e followin g claus e It i s agreed ,moreover , that t h e n ecessar ies which have been hithertoused by us both , shall rem ain i n t h e han ds of Fr aBartolommeo durin g h i s life t im e ; an d , aft er h i s death ,sai d necessaries shall devolve on Mar iotto Alb e r t i n ellian d h i s heirs ; that i s to say, a model (life-size) in wood ,an d also an other model on hi n ges ; a pair of i r on (uni nt elli gi b le) an d t h e m ode l of an in fan t inplaster , made by Sea di Desiderio (perhaps Desiderio daSettignan o , a disciple of Donatello .) l

This Registry inform s us of a n umber of pain tin gsby Fr a Bartolom meo , of which th ere i s no men tion madeby t h e hist ori an s of Art . It was probably at this period

( 1 5 1 2 ) that Marie tt e Alb er t i n elli took t h e stran ge n oti onof abandon i n g pen cil , palette , an d easel, for a pursuit morec on genial to h i s whim sical taste s.

V. Docum en t.


Mariot t o ,”

says Vasari , “ was a m an of restless ch ar act er , a lover of t h e table , an d addicte d to t h e pleasuresof life . It thus happen ed that t h e laborious minutiaean d rackin g of brain atten dan t on t h e study an d exerciseo f Art , became insuff erable to h i m . He h ad frequentlybeen n ot a little mor tified also , by t h e ton gues of h is

brother artists , who t ormen ted h i m , as their cus t om i s,

an d always h as been , t h e habit descendin g from on e t o

anothe r by in heritan ce , an d being main tained inperpe tual activity. He determin ed , therefore , t o adopta calling, which if less elevated, would b e also lessfatiguing, an d much more cheerful. Our artist, accordin gly, opened a very han dsome hotel , t h e house bein gon e of these outside t h e gate of San Gallo : but notcon tent with this, h e likewi se established a tavern an d

eatin g-house , at t h e Drago , near t h e Pon te Vecch i o . In

these places h e performed t h e duties of host, duringseveral mon ths, affirm in g that h e h ad chosen a professionwherein there was n o embarrassment with perspective ,fr esh or te n i n gs, or muscles , an d what was still more , nocriticism or censur e to dread ; whereas , that which h eh ad aban don ed was beset , on t h e con trary, with all thosedi sadvantages. Th e object of t h e callin g h e h ad left ,Mar iotto would remark, was to i m i ta te flesh an d blood ,whereas , that which h e h ad adopted , m ade both bloodan d flesh . Here , again , as h e declared, h e foun d himselfdai ly receivin g praises for h i s good win e ; wh i le i n h i s

old occupation , h e was perpetually cri ticised , an d hourlycompelled to list en t o t h e blame best owed on h i s perfor m an ces.

”1 I cannot say that that was really h i s ideaof ar t ; but I am quite certain that a more crack-brained

See Vasar i’s Life of Mar . Alb ., tran slated by Mrs. Jon athan Foster.(Boh n

’

s ed.)


paint er never han dled brush , i n Floren ce . He sub se

quen tly resumed h i s pen cil , but h e n ever reached thatpe rfection to whi ch t h e gen ius an d examples of Fr a

Bartolommeo were calculated to conduct h im .

CHAPTER V .

Fr a Bartolom m eo della Porta adheres sti ll m ore closely to t h e m ethod of t h eVen et ia n s— Perfecti on s an d Im per fection s of thi s n ew m an n er— Pai n tin gsthat belon g to it.

IF t h e reader h as ‘

atten ded seriously to what we havebeen n arrating , h e must have perceived that t h e

versati le gen ius of Port a was ever strivin g to pour tray a

beauty that seem ed to elude h im ; an d , that n ever satisfiedwith an y sin gle method , h e laboured assiduously to perfeet him self in m an y . To h im t h e Beautiful was li ke a

vario-coloured iris, alternately revealin g such diversi ty of brillian t an d fascin ati n g tin ts, that h e foun dit difficult to determin e wh i ch of them was t h e m ostgraceful , or wh i ch h e ought to copy . Such was trulyt h e fact with regard to this pain ter . He imitat ed Vin ci ,h e all but equalled Raff aello , h e rivalled t h e Ven etians ;an d , although always producin g m arvellous pain tings,h e was still dissatisfied with him self , just as if h i spencil h ad failed to realise h i s exquisite ideal . Th e

other pain ters of th i s cen t ury adopted two or three differ en t man n ers of colourin g ; but Porta added a fourth .

In this respect h e resem bled Raffaello who,in h i s youth

,

followed t h e traces of Piet ro Perugino, an d in h i s later

periods imitated both Porta an d Buon ar r ot t i .


Disengaged fr om Mariott o Alb e r t i n elli , Fr a Bart olom m eo undertook t o paint som e very large pictures , inwhich , ifI do not er r , there appears a stronger developmentof t h e method adopted by Lion ardo da Vinci , an d t h e

Ven etian s . Th e latt er having now trium phed over all

t h e other schools of Italy i n colour in g an d Chiaroscuro,

heightened, if I b e allowed t o say so , their pomp an dostentation of ar t . Hen ce , it not unfrequen tly occursthat t h e grounds of their pain tin gs ar e so darken ed byshadin g as to make t h e objects they effigi ed seemfloatin g before us i n deepest night . Thi s they practisedi n order to obtain t h e highest re lief of which ar t i s capab le ; till , at len gt h , finding t h e ordin ary tints in adequat eto their object , they began to employ t h e black colourproduced from burnt ivory , n ay, an d prin ter’s smoke , t ot h e great de trim en t of ar t an d their own works . Such a

course as th i s, adopt ed by Fr a Bartolom m eo , b yPolidoroda Caravaggio , n ay, an d sometimes even by Raffaellohim se lf, did ir reparable in jury to their pai n tin gs so

much so , t hat , i n many of Porta’s productions we can

now bare ly recognise t h e figures on their dar k an d overshaded grounds. I will now notice t h e two greatpaintin gs produced by Fr a Bartolommeo under th ist en eb r ose influence , for h i s Church of San Marco , pr em i si n g that on e of t hem h as passed in to t h e Palatinegallery. They both represent t h e Virgin seat ed on a

thron e , surroun ded by man y Saints , an d , in m y judgm ent, they determin e t h e period when this pain ter abandon ed t h e an t ique for t h e modern manner . We havealready remarked how t h e school of Giotto was wont

This caused gr eat i n jury to Do. Vi n ci’s Supper,i n t h e refectory (delle

Grazie) , at Mi lan ; an d also to Rafi‘

aello’s Tran sfiguration i n Rom e. A b out

t h e begin n in g of t h e seven teen th cen tury this error gave r ise to t h e fan aticalsect kn own as t h e Ten ebrosi . —See Lan zi’a H istory of Pain tin g, vol. 8.


to observe extreme sim plicity i n such compositions ; forthey held it as an axiom that a variety of accessor iesmust necessarily di stract t h e eye fr om t h e pri n cipal subj cet ; hence their figureswere very few ,

an d so disposed thatthey could n ot lessen t h e worship an d ven eration bestowed

on t h e Chief object. In t h e fift een th cen tury t h e artistsbegan to give a certain un ity of idea to their com position s, an d although n ot possessin g t h e sym metrical un iformity of t h e Giottesque , which i s not always pleasin gto t h e eye , they do not cause that con fusion an d di st r ac

tion in variably resultin g from an overcrowded m ultitude .

Thus t h e eye i s satisfied without lessen in g t h e religiousefl

'

ect ; an d our Friar gave such evidence ofthis happy m an

agem en t i n t h e t wo pictures at Lucca , already m en tion ed ,that they can bear com parison with these of t h e mostch ast em d artists . But in these two pain tin gs h e seem s

to have laboured to elevate hi m self to t h e rich an d gr andiose composition s, that were so delightful to that century an d t h e following : an d i n which t h e Ven etians,an d Paolo Cagliari particularly , have won t h e greatestren own . We wi ll speak of these two works i n t h e

w ords of Vasari , as we ar e not able to describe themwith greater tr uth or elegan ce . Men tion in g t h e greatpicture which ‘

was subsequen tly r em oved to t h e PittiPalace , h e thus expresses him self : Th e Virgin ,

i n

this work , i s surrounded by numerous figur es, all wellexecuted , graceful, full of expression , an d highlyan im ated ; they ar e coloured i n so bold a m anner , thatthey w ould rather seem to b e i n relief, than parts of a

level surface ; t h e m aster desir ing to show ,that h e could

not on ly dr aw , but give force , an d add t h e fittin g degreeof shadow to h i s figures, an d th i s h e h as am ply effectedin a can opy or pavilion , upheld by certain children ,

whoar e hovering in t h e ai r , an d seem to com e forth from t h e


pictur e . There i s, also , a figure of Christ , as an Infant ,espousing t h e Nun ,

S . Catherine ; t h e treatment i s boldan d free , n or i s it possible to imagine an ythin g morelife-like than this group : a cir cle of Sai n t s, receding i nperspective on each side , disappears within t h e depth of

a large recess, an d this train of figures i s arran ged wi t hso mu ch ability

,that they seem to b e real. Before t h e

prin cipal figures in this picture , there i s a San Gi orgioin armour , bearing a standard in h i s hand— an im posin g,powerful , an d life-like figure , t h e attitude of wh i ch i svery fi n e . No less worthy of praise i s t h e San Bartolom m eo , standin g upright in t h e sam e work ; an d equallyexcellent ar e t wo childr en seat ed , t h e on e playing on alute , t h e other on a lyre ; t h e first of these h as h i s legraised

.an d ben t

,h e i s supportin g h i s inst rument thereon ,

an d h i s fingers move t h e strin gs in t h e act of playingt h e ear i s ben t i n rap t att en tion to t h e harmon y ; t h ehead i s turned upwards , an d t h e mouth i s sli ghtly open ed ,with so life-like an effect, that while looking at it, t h espectator can n ot persuade himself that h e does n ot heart h e sound of t h e voice . Th e other child

,leanin g on on e

side , ben ds h i s ear t o t h e lyre , an d seems t o b e list enin gint ently, with t h e purpose of marki ng t h e degree of i t saccord with t h e lute an d voice : occupied with h i s effortsto bring h i s instrum ent int o harmony with that melody,h e h as h is eyes riveted on t h e groun d , an d turns t h e ear

attentively towards h i s companion , who i s singing an d

playin g . All these varied expressions ar e ren dered withmuch ingenuity : t h e ch i ldren ar e both sitting , as weh ave said , an d ar e clothed i n veils , every part i sadm irably executed by t h e able hand of Fr a Bar t olom

m eo , an d t h e whole work comes out most harmoniouslyfrom i t s dark shadows.

” And, again ; “ It i s obvious

that in t h e colouring of t his work,Bart olommeo h as


February 3 , 1 5 3 4 , we fi n d that t h e painting now in t h epossession of t h e Friars, was presen ted to Giovan niMaria, son of Nicole Beninten di of Floren ce , i n honorof S . Catherine , V.M. , t o whom both altar an d picturewere dedicated .

‘ Th e memoran da of t h e sacristy of SanMarco state , that t h e com panion to this picture , whichwas opposite to it i n t h e same church dedi cated t o S .

Catherin e of Sien a , was likewise given to Mon sigr .

Milan esi , a bishop , I kn ow n ot of what di ocese , A . D .

1 588 ; an d that it was transferred in 1 690 (t h e SacredCon gregation of Rome con sen tin g) to t h e apartmen t ofPrin ce Fe r di n an do , son of t h e Grand -Duke Cosim o III .

Th e prin ce caused a copy of it to b e m ade for t h e religion s , by Anton . Dom en ico Gabbian i , i n which t h e

man n er of t h e fli er i s so happily im itated , that m an y ableartists mistook it for t h e original.

2 In t h e Floren tin eAcadem y of Design , there i s another great pain tin g byPorta , t h e com position of which i s very sim ilar to thatin t h e Pitti ; but, like t h e picture of S . Bernard , retouchings have alm ost ruined it .In t h e Sien a gallery of design there ar e two verybeautiful little works, dated 1 5 1 2 ; an d they seem to b eport ion s of a very large work . On e of them representsS . Catherin e , V.M .

, an d t h e other S . Mary Magdalen e .

W h en I saw them i n October, 1 841 , they greatly pleasedm e ; t h e figures an d at t idudes bein g m ost graceful . Th e

colouring , though it h as sustain ed in j ury, i s sweet an d

harm on ious ; an d they both possess a certain delicacythat rem in ds us of Raffaello an d Vin ci . On t h e wheel

(t h e engin e of Martyrdom) we find t h e date

1 See Docum en t.3 F. Gugli elm o della Valle’s Notes to Vasari. Borgh i n i was Wron g i n

attributin g it to I‘Tan cesco Petrucci.3 I t i s com m on ly thought that these two pain tin gs were brought from t h e

Dom in ican Con ven t of San to Spir ito,i n S ien a.


There ar e two other works by Porta , concern in g t h edat es of which I have been always dubious, but it i slikely that they belon g to th i s period of h i s arti sticcareer , when blen din g t h e style of th r ee di fferen t schools,h e produced such m arvellous m aster-pieces ; I m ean t h etwo pictures n ow i n t h e Pitti Gallery . Th e fir st an dsm allest i n di m ension s i s a Holy Fam i ly ; it i s com posedthus — t h e Vir gin i s seated with t h e Divin e In fan t

(n ude) in h er arm s, an d a little S . John playfully pr esents Him with frui ts an d flowers, that h e h as i n h i s

gar m en t of camel’s hair. Th e Infan t em braces h im forh i s offerin g . S . An ne , who i s on t h e Virgin

’

s right, holdst h e little cross of S . John , whi lst S . Joseph i s reclin i n gon a sack (just as Andr ea del Sarto h as pain ted him i n t h eCloist er of t h e Church of t h e An n un ciation ) an d allowsus to see on ly a part of h i s face . They all amorously cont em plate t h e in terchan ge of infan tin e em braces, an d havetheir eyes rive ted on these two dear childr en . There i sn o heart so savage that must not b e touched at sight ofsuch a scen e . Here i s in fancy luxuriatin g i n t h e shortlived an d in effable j oys, that beam on t h e sprin g-tim e oflife ; whilst dear an d lovin g kin sfolk , sharin g them for t h ei n st ant , seem to forget all t h e bitter trials of m ature years .

Th is work , far more Clearly than an y other , reveals t h eten der an d affect ion at e soul of Porta . Perhaps this was arem in iscen ce of t h e picture which i s believed to have beencommen ced by t h e fi i ar

,an d fin ished by Rafl h ello , called

La Madon n a del Cappuccino , of which we have spoken .

Nor do I thin k that t h e picture now in t h e Pitti belon gst o t h e period i n which these two artists first associated , ast h e outlin es of t h e n ude in both t h e children ar e som e

what exaggerated , an d give evidence of t h e change whicht h e friar in troduced in to h i s latest m an n er .But we w ill n ow proceed to descri be t h e secon d

76 MEMC IRS or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

picture— t h e Deposition from t h e Cross. A “woe-begon emother lean s over t h e lifeless rem ai n s of h er Son , supportin gHi s head with h er right han d , whilst h er left holdsH is ar m . He r eyes , exhausted with weepin g, have notears ; an d sh e rivets them on t h e dead form , as though sh ewere striving to recognise t h e loved features of h er Son .

Alas ! h ow chan ged by cruel death ! John , t h e beloveddisciple , raises t h e dead body on h i s knee , an d with bothh i s arms approximates it to t h e Virgin’s bosom . All h i sgrief i s i n h i s in n erm ost hear t ; an d h i s counten an ceeviden ces a certain terror an d pity , indi catin g h orroro f t h e trem en dous deed . Magdalen e thr ow s herself ont h e feet of h er beloved Master , an d affection ately bathesthem with h er tears, an d em braces them . Nothin g can

b e m ore exquisite than t h e n ude of t h e Redeemer , wh oi s laid on a block of ston e , covered w ith a white cloth ;an d it i s so adm irably coloured that it m ay b e pronoun cedi n every respect

,perfect. I do not hesitate to say, that

this work i s worthy a place beside t h e two i n Lucca ,for it i s t h e third in t h e order of m erit . Th e groun d oft h e picture h as n o perspective , but i s all covered w ith a

heavy sh adin g subsequen tly added , an d which can celled ,perhaps, t h e two figures of S . Peter an d S . Paul , thatwere distin ctly visible i n t h e tim e of Boceh i .1

Th e learn ed have raised a con troversy concern in g thiswork , which we will notice briefly . Vasari , at t h e beginn ing of Bar t olom m eo

’

s life , writes, “ In San Gallo h ecom m en ced a picture , which was aft erwards fin ished byGiuliano Bugiardini , an d i s now on t h e altar of SanJacopo-t r a-Fossi , at t h e corner of t h e Alberti .” In t h e

Le Bellezze della citta di Firen ze, scr i t t é da Bocchi, ed aecr esciute da

Gio. C in ell i. When An drea del Sarto un dertook t o pain t a Deposition fort h e Cam aldules e Mon ks of San Pier 8 Luco delMugello, h e design ed S. Peteran d S. Paul i n t h e sam e m an n er.

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S 77

life , however, of t h e pain ter Bugiardi n i , h e thus expresseshimself: Mariotto Alb e r t i n elli havin g seen these an d

other works by Giuliano , an d kn owing that h e di d n ot

deviate a hair’s-breadth from t h e design s before him , as

soon as h e determin ed to aban don t h e ar t , commissionedhim to fin ish a pain tin g wh i ch h i s fii en d an d companion ,Fr a Bartolommeo , h ad left design ed an d shaded in watercolours, as was h i s cust om . Giuliano

,therefore , se t to

work , an d wi th great diligen ce an d labour executed thispicture , that was afterwards placed in t h e church of SanGallo , outside t h e gate an d fin ally i n San

Jacopo-t r a-Fossi , at t h e corn er of t h e Albe rti , where it isa t present on t h e high altar ; this picture represents t h edead Christ, Magdalen e em bracing Hi s feet, an d S . Johnt h e Evan gelist, who holds Hi s head an d supports Himon on e knee ; there i s also S . Peter weepin g, an d S . Paulwho , wi th extended arms, contemplates h i s Lord lyin g

Le t us now see whether t h e Deposition from t h e

Cross, by Fr a Bart olom m eo , actually in t h e Pitti palace ,is t h e very on e which Vasari describes in on e place as

fin i sh ed , an d i n an other as colour ed , by Giu liano Bugiardi ni ; for we m ay here stat e t hat Porta very oft en repeatedt h e sam e subject. Moreove r, le t it b e rem em bered thatt h e authority of Bocchi an d Masselli would establish i t sidentity with that work . It m ay b e objected , that herewe have not t h e two figures of S . Peter an d S . Paul ,an d on ly that of t h e Virgi n ,

of which Vasari i s silen t.But we have already observed, that t h e figures of t h e

Apostles were covered with a heavy colourin g at t h e

tim e t h e picture was restored ; an d t h e fact of there be in g

l Vasar i, Loc. C i t . We m ay con ject ure that this un fin ished picture fellto t h e lot of Mar iotto Alb er t i n elli , a t t h e dissoluti on of t h e partn ership, eventhough i t b e n ot m en tion ed i n t h e syn dic’s catalogue. Th e Deposition i n t h ePitti h as been e n graved by Stei n le.


a figur e un n oticed by Vasar i i s a still m ore con vin cingproof of t h e im perfection of t h e h i storian’s memory .

Ne ither would it b e reason able to suppose that such a veryper fect pai n tin g was t h e work of t wo artists ; an d we ,therefore , agree with Rosin i , who says , Th e Deposition ,by Fra Bart olom m eo , excels in colouri ng t h e other fourpictures by h im ,

which ar e in t h e Pitti Gallery . Therefore , Bugi ardin i , an exact yet mediocre pain t er , couldn ot have coloured t h e Deposition m ore beautifully thanFr a Bartolom m eo coloured t h e S . Mark , t h e Jesus Risen ,t h e En thron ed Virgin , an d t h e Holy Family ; an d th i swas that Fr a Bartolom m eo who

,accordi ng to Vasari , (a

very competen t j udge of t h e Artistic works of others) .

gave such gr acefi i l colour in g to h i s figures. Now , whowill believe that Bugiardin i excelled h im in this part icular Masselli an d Rosin i , therefore , ar e of opin ionthat t h e two figures of S . Peter an d S . Paul were fin ishedor coloured by Bugiardin i , an d that being im perfect orvery mediocre , they were can celled when t h e pain t ingwas u n dergoing restoration .

1 We very readily subscribethis opin ion .

We will now speak of t h e Abduction of Din a, whichbein g left un fin ished by Fr a Bartolom meo , was perfectedby Bugiardin i , an d gave ri se to a con troversy analogousto t h e form er .2 “ An other work ,

”

says Vasari , “ begun

Siepi. Descrizion e Trop. Ist . della citta di Perugia, vol . 2 , p. 447 . In

t h e Palace of t h e Pen n a there i s a picture by Fr a Bartol. represen ti n g Christlyin g dead on Hi s Mother’s bosom : t h e Vir gin h as an Apos t le on either sideof h er . I n t h e choir of San Dom en ico, at Prato, i s a copy of t h e Deposi tioni n t h e Pitti. In this work, which I take to have been executed h y I‘h 'aPaolin o da Pi st oja, t h e t wo figures of S . Peter an d S. Paul ar e very i n di fferen t ly coloured. N iccolo An t i n or i possesses an other very beautiful copy,which looks like an or igin al . I thin k

,however, that it belon gs to t h e six

t een t h cen tury ; it h as n ot t h e t wo figures of t h e Apostles. I am told thatthere is i n Val-d’Elsa, an other Deposition by Fr a Bar t el. very like t h e on e

in t h e Pitti .9 I. E. Th e Deposition m en tion ed i n p. 7 7 .

S CULPTORS,AND ARCHITECTS . 79

by t h e same mast er, representin g t h e Abduction of Din a,was subsequen tly colour ed by t h e sam e Giulian o ; therear e i n th i s picture ce rtai n bui ldi n gs,

”

e t c . In t h e lifeof Bugiardini

,however, instead of sayin g that this

pictur e was colour ed , h e assert s that it was fin ished byGiulian o

, addi n g , that h e made a copy of it , which w as

brought t o Fran ce. Masselli , i n a n ote to this passage ofFr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s life, be in g led in to error by Vasari ,affirms, that Bugi ardini di d n ot fin i sh

,but Sim ply m ade

a copy of t h e Abduction by t h e friar .’ A docum en tbrought t o light by Gaye , rem oves all doubt con cern in gt h e work i n que stion . This i s a lette r from Paolo Min ito Barto lom m eo Valori

,dated Floren ce , October 8 , 1 5 3 1 .

En um eratin g some works of ar t executed about thatperiod i n Flore n ce , h e says, Bugiardi n i h as fin isheda beautiful work designed by t h e friar of San Marco ;a n d Miche lan giolo i s n eve r tired of praisin g it . It i st h e history of Din a, taken from t h e Old Testam en t

an y prin ce m ight b e proud of it ; an d if t h eDuke o f Alban ia kn ew of it , h e would n ot lose it at an yprice . It i s n ot fi n i sh ed .

”2 This clearly proves whathan d Gi ulian o h ad i n t h e picture , an d con firm s t h e

authority of Vasari . Th e m em oirs of t h e con ven t of

S an Marco do n ot m en tion this work ; but Masselli tellsus that Ran ieri , for whom it w as executed , sold it to t h ebishop of Ricasoli ; an d that it was purchased i n t h e lastc en tury by Ign atius Hugfor d , t h e pain ter . At h i s deathit was sold to Mr . Sm ith , t h e En glish Con sul , at Ve n ice ,a n d it i s n ow ,

probably , i n En glan d.

Havin g gi ve n these n otice s of t h e life as well as workso f Porta

,an d particularly of these which irrefragable

authority or valid con j ectures attribute to this period of

Masselli . Rosin i Stor ia de lla Pitt.


h is artistic career , we will close t h e present chapt er witha deliberation of t h e Dom in ican Fathers of San Marco ,which m ay have been greatly influenced by our pai nter .In April , 1 5 1 2 , t h e celebrated Father Pagn i n i , a

devote d patron of t h e fi n e arts , be in g again superiorof San Marco , t h e religious, in fluenced , mayhap , by Fr aBartolom meo , dete rmin ed to ren ew t h e ancien t chur chof San Marco , which still retain ed i t s old gothi c design ,as m ay b e seen by t h e litt le choir , t h e on ly remain s oft h e pri m itive edi fice now standin g. As there were somefathers of t h e Tuscan convents then in Florence , at t h egeneral chapter Pagn i n i brought them together to takecoun sel with them on t h e 2 7 t h day of sai d month an dyear . He there developed h is project, an d proposed as t h earchit ect , Baccio d

’

Agn olo , t h e sam e who , with Cronaca ,h ad directed t h eworks in t h e Council-Hall of t h eRepublic ,durin g t h e times of Savonarola , an d who h ad constructedt h e stairs to t h e cupola of t h e cathedral of Floren ce . In

order to meet t h e expense , h e suggest ed that t h e j uspat r on at us of som e of t h e Chape ls should b e given to a cer

tain num ber of t h e C itizen s, on con di tion that they wouldcon tribute to t h e un dertakin g. Th e projectm ously approved , an d t en of t h e fathers subscrib ed i t ,an d Baccio d’Agn olo was declared t h e architect . Th e

act of t h e coun cil , however , was followed by another ,passed by t h e Defi n i t ory of t h e chap t er of San Marco

,

adjourn ing all further proceedings till t h e n ew generalassem bly m e t , which was to decide or fin ally rej ect t h econtemplated alte rations.

‘ Alarm ed at t h e heavy ex

pense , an d still in debt for t h e n ew noviciate recen tlyerec t ed , they thought no more of t h e church , whosein terior was remodelled in 1 580, after t h e designs of t h e

Ricordan ze,B


on ly just to en title them both supreme an d un appr oach

able masters . Every artist i n Floren ce burned with a

desire to set out for Rom e, there to behold t h e works of

these m agn ificen t gen iuses , an d to profit by their productions ; an d Porta, too , lon ged to stand within t h e walls oft h e city of t h e Caesars

,n ot on ly to m eet h im who was

heave n ’

s privileged pain t er, but to em brace on ce more t h efrien d an d com pan ion of h i s studies— t h e m an who h adin itiated him i n t h e secrets of perspective . Havin g oh

t ai n ed t h e necessary facult ies from h i s superiors, t h e Friarse t out for Rom e i n t h e year 1 5 1 4 ; proceedin g throughSiena an dViterbo . It appears in dubitable that h e tarriedSom e tim e i n t h e con ven t of S .Maria della Quercia , n eart h e latter city , an d , at t h e request of t h e mon ks, comm en ced t wo pictures , fin ishin g on e an d leavin g t h e othe rimperfect . Th e subject of t h e first was our Lord Rise n ,

appearin g to Mary Magdalen e as t h e garde n er . Th e

secon d w as t h e B . V. M. , surr oun ded by sain ts o f t h e

Dom in ican Order— a work of very large dim ension s ,which h e m erely design ed . Vasar i says that MariottoAlb er t i n elli com m en ced a pain tin g for S . Maria dellaQuercia , an d that h e left it un fin ished , as h e h ad made uph i s m in d to go to Rom e . He does not state what t h e sub

ject of this pain tin g was ; but in t h e life of Jaeepo Pontormo

,as though forgetful of what h e h ad writt en i n that

of Mariotto , h e adds : Not lon g after Mariotto h ad leftFloren ce— (aft er Raffaello

’

s arrival in said city)— for Vit e r b o , i n order to w ork at t h e picture that Fr a Bartolom m eo h ad com m en ced. These words, we n eedhardly say,

leave us i n doubt as to whether Vasari speaksof on e or of t wo differe n t pictures. Neither should weom it rem ark i n g that h e con foun ds t h e chron ologi cal orderof t h e life of these pain ters ; sin ce it i s im possible to suppose that Fr a Bartolom meo would have left Flore n ce for


Viterbo , durin gRaffaello’

s soj ourn within t h e walls of t h em odern Athen s ; or that Mariotto se t ou t in 1 5 1 4 . Th e

m em oirs of t h e Co n ven t della Quercia state t h e very con ~

t r ary, an d in form us that t h e picture which Porta left umfin ished was perfected by Fr a Paolin o di Pi st oja.

When Fr a Bartolom m eo arrived i n Rom e , Leo X . h ad

just ascen ded t h e Pon tifical thron e ; Raffaello was pain ti n g i n t h e Vatica n t h e histor ies ofAttila an d t h e im prisonmen t of S . Pe ter ; an d Miche lan giolo was m odellin g ors culpturin g t h e statue of Mose s, for t h e tom b of Julius II . ;

whilst Fr a Giocon do , with Giulian o , supplied t h e placeo f Bram ante , i n bui ldin g t h e basilica sacred to t h e Pri n ceo f t h e Apostles . Th e Pon t ifi

'

,m ost certai n ly , was n ot ig

n or an t of t h e n am e an d fam e of t h e pain ter of San Marco,

for we have already state d that our friars h ad presen tedh i m wi th som e of h i s works ; an d Vasari write s that Fr aBart olom m eo h ad execu t ed som e pa i n t i n gs f or Ca r d i n a lG iova n n i de

’ Medici .” Nevertheless, h e did n ot fi n d

a Macacuss i n t h e Pon tiff, but i n t h e person of a verysin gular m an

,Whom we m ust n eeds m ake known to our

readers . This was Fr a Marian o Fetti , a lay brother oft h e con ven t of San Mar co . Havin g received t h e Dom in ican habit frorn Fr a Gerolamo Savon arola , h e was a spectator of t h e di r eful tragedy which closed t h e career o f t h eRepublican Friar . AS soon as Fr a Ger olam o

’

s partisan swere dispersed or m urdered by t h e oligarchs , this laybrother began to flatter an d fawn on t h e Medici . Bein ga facetious character an d an in termin able charlatan , h e

secured t h e favour of Cardi n al Giovan n i de i Medici , w h o ,as soon as h e ascen ded t h e Pon tifical thron e , brought toh i s cour t this Flore n tin e lay-brother , who was far bettere n titled to t h e n am e of Fr a Ca r n eva le, than was t h e r e

ligi ous artist Corradin i . I won der if,durin g t h e tim e h e

was performin g t h e r ole of court-jester t o Lee X .

, h e ever


called to mind t h e calamit ous 2 3 r d ofMay, 1 498 ! Itwould appear , however, that h e regarded h i s novel ocen

pat ion as i n every respect disgraceful to t h e habit whichh e received at t h e han ds of t h e rigid reformer , an d h etherefore un frocked him self to en t er another Order , cert ain lynot less ven erable .

‘ As t h e reward of h i s witticisms,h e asked an d obtained t h e con ven t of San Silvestro onMonte Cavallo , for h i s Congregation of Tuscany. He

then besought t h e Pontiff to appoint h i m a monk of t h eSignet , an d h i s prayer was accordi ngly granted , although

l All European sovereign s of this peri od r etain ed jest ers i n their courts,an d what won der i f Leo X. did t h e l ike ? Th e supper hour was t h e tim e

appoin ted for these am usin g folk to as sem ble, an d t h e Tran slator extracts t h efollowi n g n otices (br ief though they b e) of t h e jesters m en tion ed i n t h e text,from F. Ti r ab osch i

’

s Storia della Letteratura Italian a.

” Quern e , wh o was an ative of t h e kin gdom of Naples, was a m ere pedan t an d a very b ad im provisat or e i n Latin . Th e Pon t ifi

‘ ordered h i m in to h i s presen ce each even in g,when h e was at supper, an d perm itted h im to drin k out of h is own glas s, oncon dition that h e recited Latin verses on a subject furn ished by h is Holi n esshim se lf

,wh o occas ion ally rhym ed. Quern o, for exam ple, began thus :

Ar ch ipoeta facit versus pr o m ills poetis ;an d t h e Pon t ifi

'

r ej oin ed ,Et pro m ille aliis Ar ch ipoeta b i b i t .

Then quoth Quern ePor r ige, quod faciat m ihi carm in a docta Falern um .

An d t h e Pope, alludin g to t h e gout with whi ch t h e crapulous Quer n o wasaffl icted. replied

Hoe etiam en ervat , deb i li ta t que pedes.”

Barab allo was a n ative of Gaeta- (where t h e Con stable Bourbon i s buried ,an d where Pius IX. took refuge after flyi n g from Rom e). He was a veryin differen t rhym er, an d t h e Rom an s of Leo’s golden days did h i m t h e hon ourof a m ock tri um ph . Th e elephan t, however, which bore t h e very ludi crousperson of Bar ab allo, ’

spite of goads an d cudgels, r efused to carry h i s bur denfarther than t h e bridge of S. An gelo, - t h e sapien t an im al havin g reason edhim self i n to a belief that h e should n ot take an y part i n profan in g t h e Capitolwhere Petrar ca received h is laurels—Fm Mar ian o Fetti took t h e Dom in ican habit i n 1 495 , an d died i n that of t h e Cistercian s, A .D .

, 1 53 1 . Th e

Dom in ican s gave up t h e con ven t of San S ilvestro to Paul III., as Clemen tVII. h ad aggregated S. Maria Sopra M in erva to t h e Tuscan Con gregat ion .


Benvenuto Ce lli n i‘was refused thi s dignity . Le t us hereobserve that this office was conferred on t h e most emin entartists , who subsequen tly took t h e Cistercian habit , an dwere called t h e brotherhood of t h e lead , because theirduty was to append t h e Signet (leaden) to t h e bulls an d

diplomas of t h e Popes . Amongst t h e artists whomLeo X . appoin ted , were Sebastiano Luciani , t h e Venetianpain t er , an d Gerolamo Lom bardi

,t h e Milanese sculptor.

When Fr a Bartolomm eo arrived in Rome , Fra MarianoFetti , Bar ab allo , an d Quer n o , to whom they gave t h e

sob r i quet of“Arch-Poet ,

” were am usin g t h e pontiffevery even i n g during supper ; an d as it was necessary, i norder to secure Leo’s good-will , that all h i s courtiersshould patron ise t h e Arts , Fr a Mariano followed t h e pr evailin g fashion , an d invit ed Polidoro da Caravaggio ,Baldassare Peruzzi , an d Mariotto Alb e r t i n elli , to paint i nt h e church of San Silvestro . Fr a Bartolommeo h adscarcely made h i s appearan ce , when Fetti declared h imse lf h i s Macaen as, an d comm ission ed h im to pain t two

great figur es of S . Pe t er an d S . Paul for h i s church onMon te Cavallo .

Porta ’s first act was to embrace Raff aello ? It is easyt o conceive how these two frien ds m e t , an d how warmwere their greetings. Raffaello , no doubt, brought t h e

Cell in i , i n h i s life , writt en by him self, states ( chap. x i .) that a m on k oft h e lead or sign et was worth 800 gold crown s an n ually.

2 Whilst these pages were goin g t hrough t h e press a beautifulfr esco by Raffaello was discovered i n t h e suppressed m on astery of S . On ofr io,i n Via Fae n za (Floren ce) . I t repr ese n ts our Lord

, w ith t h e Apost les, at t h elast supper : all t h e figur es ar e lif e-size. Th e wor k i s in scr ibed 1 505 . All

this con firm s what we have sai d con cern i n g t h e period i n which Raffaello studied colour in g un der our Friar. This was between 1 506 an d 1 507for t h e critics of Ar t do n ot here observe t h e sign s of Ra ti'aello’s n ew an d

gran diose style. We ar e i n debted t o Zott i an d Coun t Carlo della Porta forthis discover v.

86 m n moras or EMINENT PAINTERS

Friar of San Marco to behold all h i s pain tin gs , an d thesethat Giulio Romano an d h i s other di sciples w ere execu t

ing after h i s designs ; an d h e showed h im , as we m aywellsuppose , t h e cartoon s of those won dr ous tapestries thatwere subseque n tly wrought in Flan ders . How must n o tPorta’s heart have thr i lled at witn essin g t h e rapid ad

van ces of h i m who h ad been h i s disciple in colourin g !ln capable of harbourin g a sen tim en t of envy , h e musthave lauded h i s purity i n design , t h e elegan ce of h i sfigur es, an d t h e sweet an d tran qui l harm on y of h i s ti n tin gs , an d all these perfection s which shall consecrate t h ege n ius of San zio throughout all future ages. But whatmade t h e deepest im pression on Port a’s mi n d , was t h e

n um ber of an cien t statues that Rome possessed . Miche lan gi olo , we m ay con jecture , conduct ed h im to see a partof t h e mon um en t to Julius t h e Second , at which h e w as

the n en gaged ; an d these stupendous frescoes of Gen esisan d t h e Prophe ts which h e h ad j ust then fin ished i n t h e

Sixtin e . This , i n all probability , was t h e first tim e h e

h ad ever seen an y great work by Buon arroti , for t h e cartoon s of t h e war of Pisa were n ot ye t coloured . Placedbetween those two gran d lum in aries , t h e Friar did n o t

kn ow which of them h e ought to select as h i s m ode l .San zio sac rificed everythin g to t h e Graces, an d Miche lan giolo aspired to t h e gr a n d iose an d sublim e . Th e form erwas educatin g a chosen ban d of youths, in to whom h e

tran sfused all t h e suavi ty of h i s pen cillin g ; But Buon ar ot t i ,

” writes Pietro Giordan i , whose gen ius was

haughty , desired rather to stand alon e than b e called t h eforem ost m an of h i s age , an d disdain in g to w alk i n t h e

way already marked out, lost him self i n n ew paths . Th e

great m an did n o t rem em ber that Art needs scien ce morefor practical results than for mere pom p ; an d bein gdeeply skilled i n an atomy, h e made a most osten ta


tious parade of“it. Hi s gr and aim seem s always to have

been to produce som ethin g tran scen din g n ature . Th e

authority‘

of h i s n ame in duced man y to follow him , whosem in or in tellects an d in ferior powers covered their attem ptswith sham e .

”l Fr a Bart olom m eo,who h ad walked i n t h e

footprin ts ofLion ardo , Raffaello , an d t h e Ven etian s, str uckw ith aston ishm en t by t h e works of Michelan giolo , an dsee in g that Raff aello him self was rivallin g this sovereign

gen ius by t h e en largem en t of h i s m an n er , determ in ed toen ter this aren a where very few have com e off t r ium

phan t , an d where thousan ds have sign ally failed . Andhere we m ust di ssen t with Lan zi , who writes that Portahavin g gon e to Rom e to see t h e works of Buon arroti

an d Raffaello , greatly e levated h i s style ; but h i s man n erwas at all tim es m ore con form able to that of h i s fri en dthan of h i s fellow—citizen ,

un itin g dign ity w ith grace i nh i s heads an d i n h i s gen eral design . Th e picture i n t h ePitti palace , which Pietro da Cor ton a im agin ed to b e t h ew ork of Raffaello

,i s a proof of this, though t h e Friar

painted it before h e wen t to Rom e .

”2 Now, we will ask ,

how can t h e pictur e i n t h e Pitti prove that h e en largedh i s m an n er after seein g t h e works i n Rom e , sin ce it h asbeen adm itted that h e produced this pict ure before h e set

out for that city? We will , therefore , bow to t h e aut h o

rity of those w h o state,that it was i n h i s last m an n er t h e

Friar follow ed t h e precepts an d exam ples of Michelan giolo . In th i s last period of h i s artistic career , Portasom e tim es e n large s h i s outlin es , even to exaggeration ;an d h i s dr aper ies ar e n ot on ly bold

,but partake of m an

n e r i sm . Algar ot t i regards Porta as b yn o m ean s elevatedi n t h e flesh of h i s vulgar m ale figures ; but, on t h e con

1 Opere di Pie tro Giordan i.2 Lan z i

’

s Hi story of Pain tin g, tran slated by Mr . Roscoe.

88 MEMOIRS or EMINEN'I’ PAINTERS

,

t r ary, rude . In this particular , t h e Caracci an d Mengspronounced t h e same opin i on of Buonarroti . Whencould anythi n g like t his have been said of Raffaello an d

h is followers ? I t h i n k it i s because they did not kn owt h e influence which t h e various schools of Italy exercisedover Fr a Bar t olommeo , that this disparity of opin ion h asarisen amongst artists , who at on e time te rm him graceful ,an d at another almost rude ; but as soon as we shall haveillustrated t h e four mann ers wh i ch h e adop ted successi vely, all these di screpancies shall b e reconciled .

Com pare t h e picture i n t h e Cathedral of Lucca, or t h eGod t h e Father blessin g St. Catherine an d S . Mary Magdalen e , with that of t h e Christ Risen , now i n t h e Pi t t ipalace ; an d in these th r ee works, that mark t h e begin n ingan d termin ation of Porta’s career, you will easily discovert h e imitation of Rafif aello an dMichelangi olo . In t h e firsth e appears to b e tr uly noble an d graceful ; in t h e second ,certain ly gr an d iose , though somewhat ignoble . If h islast manner i s deprived of some perfections by i t s e n

larged st yle , in my opinion h i s secon d an d third exce l iti n elegan ce an d simplicity . Moreover , t h e mild an d de~

von t soul of t h e pain ter was be t t er adapted t o that in genuous manifestation of Ar t which characte rise s a geniuswhich was naturally reposeful an d tranquil. For my ow npart

, when ever I see Mich elan giolo’

s Moses , I at oncerecognize t h e fearless hand an d soul of him who di d n o t

dread t h e gr ea t i r e of t h e secon d-”l but i n t h e S . Mark by

Fr a Baat olom m eo , I seek in vain for that tr emblin g Bacciodella Porta , who shuddered when t h e Ar ab b iat i werethunderin g at t h e gates of t h e besieged convent.Hi s first essay, in t h e n ew style ofMichelan giolo , were

t h e two Apostles, that h e un dertook to colour for Fr a

Ariosto.


ties ar e well outlin ed— t h e heads ar e life-like an d

speakin g— but w e can n ot praise t h e n on -n atural attitudeof S . Pe ter, wh o holds t h e volum e i n h i s left han d .

Nobody can see these figures wi thout recogn isin g t h e

n ew an d en larged style .

l Bottari an d FatherPun gileon i ,write that t h e most di stin guished artists i n Rom e tookthese t wo Apostles to b e t h e work ofRaffaello .

These two pictures were n ot ye t fin ished , when Fr aBartolom m eo took leave of h i s fri en ds, an d se t out forFloren ce . Th e con t em plation of t h e chef d’oeuvres,with which Rome aboun ded , produced t h e m ost m arvel~

lous impression on t h e soul of our Friar , a circum stan cewhich also happen ed to An drea del Sarto , to Rosso , an dt o other truly em in en t m asters , whose m odesty was equalto t h e confiden ce of in n um erable artists of m ediocrity,who freque n tly en j oyed , at Rom e , m uch ill-placed con fidence .

” 2 Perhaps it was at this period that t h e germ s of

I These two pain tin gs wer e rem oved t o t h e Quirin al . Father Ser afi n oGui dotti , t h e Dom in ica n pa in ter , to whom we have alluded elsewhere, h asfur n ished m e w ith t h e followi n g particulars regardi n g them ,

i n a letter, datedJun e 2 3 rd

,1 845 I have seen t h e t wo Apostles

,by Fr a Bartolom m eo

,on

Mon te Cavallo. They ar e both all b ut destroyed, or m iserably restored,

except t h e head of S t . Peter, which is i n good preservation . This is ex

wedin glywe ll pai n ted, an d far better than t h e gen erality ofFra Bar t olom m ed s

heads.” These t wo works were en graved i n outl in e by Garzoli, an d pub

li sh ed i n t h e “ Ape It alian s .

”Th e origi n al cartoon s ar e in t h e Floren tin e

Academ y of Design , an d have been design ed by A. Tr i cca an d en graved by G .

Ferri. Th e Syn dic of t h e Con ven t of San Marco speaks of these pictures thusItem two pictures, of about four braccia i n height, on e of whi ch represen ts

S . Peter, an d t h e other S . Paul,valued at XXX. ducats, b ut as t h e S . Peter

i s som ewhat im perfect,I set h i m down at XV. ducats. These pictures wer e

given to San S ilvestro. S ign or Tom m aso M in ardi assures m e, that h e saw i nan old ab a t ial church ( n ow aban don ed) n ear Rom e, an un fi n ished fresco, byFra Bartolom m eo—’

t is i n a very rui n ous state. Mayhap t h e Fr iar pr oducedthis dur i n g an excursion in t o t h e subur bs, for t h e sake of h i s health, which wasthen faili n g, an d caused h im to leave this, as well as t h e S . Peter, im perfect.

3 History of Pai n tin g, by Lan zi. V. Boh n’

s Ed.


t h e m alady , which soon aft erwards brought him down tot h e grave , were sowed ; for after h i s return to Floren ce ,h i s health was always variable , an d h i s soul was overcastby t h e gloom iest thoughts. Havin g fin ished t h e figureof S . Paul , an d left that of S . Peter im perfect, Fr aBartolommeo on ce more em braced Raffaello , whom h e

was n ever to see again ; an d on expressin g h i s regret atbein g obliged to leave t h e picture unfin ished , Sanzio ,who loved t h e Friar of San Marco as h i s friend , an dven erated him as h i s m aster , kin dly proposed to completeit

,with h i s own han d, to which Porta gladly an d than k

fully con sen ted . What could have been m ore kin d thanth i s offer of t h e divin e Raffaello , who was then employedon so m an y an d such im portan t works ?Fr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s soj ourn at Rom e can n ot haveexceeded m ore than on e or two m on ths . Havin greached Flore n ce i n t h e m id-sum m er of 1 5 1 4 , h e fell sick ;an d we find h im ,

early i n July, in t h e hospice of t h eDomin i can s i n Pian di Mugnon e , strivin g to regain h i slost health . He h ad then with him two disciples,probably Fr a Paolino an d Fr a Agostin o , whom h e caused ,by way of indoctrin atin g them , to paint some historiesof t h e holy Fathers , which n o lon ger exist ; an d h e

himself, though very infi rm ,painte d on t h e wall a

Madon n a, with t h e In fan t in h er arm s, which still remain s,an d eviden ces h i s en larged an d n ew style .

‘

But , before describin g t h e works executed by Portai n this fourth an d last period of h i s pictorial career , Wemust n eeds throw som e light on i t s characteristics an d

n ature that we m ay b e able to iden tify t h e pain tin gsthat belon g to it , an d ascen d

,if possible , to t h e ge n eral

prin ciples fi om which h e seem s to have derivedthis mann er . If we accom plish this, it m ust serve

1 V. See Docum en t.


to illust rat e t h e artistic history of th is distin guishedlimn er.Th e great maj ority of t h e pain ters who flourished i n

t h e fift eenth cen tury, h ad inherited from t h e Giotto-Schoolan d t h e Min iaturist s, a certain fin en ess of execut ion i nthe ir pai n tings

,which

,on C lose inspection , exhibited t h e

overwrought diligence an d deli cacy of m in iatures . Nay,

even design itse lf, evidenced t h e greatest tim idity , as

though it dreaded t o overstep t h e confin es of t h e true .

Colouring, t oo , though highly ton ed an d harm on ious , h adn ot as yet aspired to that illudi n g of t h e senses, b ymean sof which t h e figures seem t o m ove an d detach themselvesfrom t h e picture . Not to men tion t h e other difficultieswhich Art h ad to encoun ter, as for example , for esh or ten i n g, an d what painte rs term sot to i n en , t h e latterwere either ign oran t or tim id , an d these characte ristics ar eto b e found in t h e very attitudes of the ir figures, which ,accordin g to custom , were always i n a state of calm , an d

as reposeful i n the ir ac t i on as in t h e expression of theirfeatures . But at t h e beginni ng of t h e sixteenth century ,an d in these that followed , pain te rs dete r m in ed to em ancipate them selves from what they regarded as t h e slaveryan d harshness of t h e ancient m asters . Wh erefore theybegan to enlarge t h e outlines of their designs, an d to showby t h e man agement of tendons an d m uscles, that theyh ad studied anatom y with peculiar diligen ce . In colouri n g, t oo , they aban don ed heavy shadin g for bold an d

masterly strokes of t h e pen ci l , which rendered t h e concept ion more energetic . In fact, they in som e sort resembled these poets whose strains ar e rapidly written w ithoutheed to polished elegance . These paintin gs seen from a

di stan ce , have a boldness an d origi nality th at asto n ish


think , moreover , that t h e works of Michelan giolo , an d

these of t h e Greek an d Latin sculptors i n Rom e , so i n

fluen ced Porta, that we m ay trace eviden ces of t h e m ar

bles an d statues, as we ll in t h e movemen t as in t h e formsof h i s figures . These defects ar e i n a great part com pensated by t h e m an y beauties that ar e di scern ible in h i slatest pain tings , whi ch rival Paolo Veron ese i n fertili ty ;whilst they dispute t h e palm with Tizi an o Vecellio i nt h e vi gour of their tin ts , an d with Michelan giolo i nthe ir gran di ose style .

On ce m ore i n Floren ce , Fr a Bar t olom m eo’

s first carewas to perfect Fr a Paolino del Sign or accio in pain ting ,that h e m ight thus bequeath a successor in ar t to h i s i nst i tut e ; an d , in order to teach h im design , an d t h e m anagement of light an d shadows, h e caused him to model inplaster, an d for this purpose availed himself of t h eassistan ce of that renown ed modeller Ambrogio dellaRobbia. Nothin g could have been be tt er than practiceof this sort , then very usual amon gst t h e Floren tin eartists , though sooth to say it h as been n eglected i n ourtimes. Th e Florentin e pain ters , like all mem bers of the irprofession , were n ot very remarkable for the ir charitablecri ticism s on each others perform an ces ; an d they n ow

began t o whisper i n their co t eries that Fr a Bartolom meo ,though a very perfect colom i st , was nowi se capable ofproducin g an y good work in t h e nude ; n ay, that h eexcelled i n t h e folds of h i s draperies, an d covered all h i s

figures with a superabundance of robes , i n order to conceal this im perfect ion . Some went farther , an d added

,

that h e h ad neither ar t nor gen ius for large figures ,albeit h e h ad already pain ted figures of t h e n atural size .

These two accusation s reveal t h e n ature of t h e tim es ;

for, at that period , h e alon e was term ed an ableartist who best depicted naked members ; an d in all


h i s works followed t h e proportion s of t h e an cientstatues . Charges of this character , repeated i n t h e followin g cen tury , caused Gian Bologn a to produce t h e

celebrated group known as t h e Rape of t h e Sabin es.

‘

In fact , Don atello was won t to say, that t h e satiricalin vecti ves of h i s fellow-citizen s did h im more good thant h e acclamation s an d applause of t h e Venetians ; as t h e

form er stim ulated h im to perfect him self i n ar t , whereast h e latt er wou ld have stayed h im on t h e way an d causedhim to thin k him self perfect. Porta’s am our propre wasw oun ded ; an d though at all tim es abhorrin g t h e n ude ,h e n erved him self for t h e trial ; an d i n order to prove h owdeeply learn ed h e was i n t h e study of t h e hum an body

,

h e design ed an d coloured t h e holy Mar tyr S . Sebastian ,

n’

aked . We will leaveVasari to describe it . “ To this en dh e pain ted a S . Sebastian , wholly un draped , by way of specimen ; t h e colou rin g of this figure i s like that of t h elivin g flesh , t h e count en ance most beautiful , an d i n perfee t harm on y with t h e beauty of t h e form ; t h e wholework

,i n short , i s finished with exquisite de licacy

,in so

m uch,that it obtain ed h i m in fin ite praise from t h e artists .

It was said that when this paintin g was put up i n t h echurch

, t h e m on ks discovered from what they heard i nt h e confession als , that t h e grace an d beauty of t h e vividim itat ion of life , imparted to h i s work by t h e talen ts ofFr a Bartolom m eo , h ad given occasion to t h e si n of lightan d evil thoughts ,

they con sequen tly rem oved it fromt h e church an d placed it i n t h e Chapter House , but I t didn ot rem ain there lon g, havin g been purchased byGiovann i Battista della Palla , who sent it to t h e Kin g ofFrance .

”2 I believe that this work , though it di d not

Raffaello Borgh i n i , II R iposo.9 This Palla was t h e picture dealer m en tion ed by Vasari in h i s Life ofA n dr ea del Sarto.


exceed t h e lim its of decency, was subsequen tly a causeof remorse an d shame t o t h e good Friar. Certain i t i sthat h e n ever agai n pain ted a n ude figure . Th e Memoi r s

of t h e coven t of San Marco in form us that this picture

was four an d a half braccia high ; an d that besides t h efigure of t h e holy m artyr , there was also that of a little

an gel ; an d that it was valued at on ly twenty ducats— an

insign ifican t sum , verily , for such a work . Vasari as suresus that this picture h ad n o landscape , but that h e drewon t h e pan el a ni che in perspective , which h as t h e

appearance of be in g carved i n relief, thus pain tin gorn am ent which served as a fl am e to t h e figure which h eh ad executed in t h e middle of h i s work . And whosoever desires to learn t h e reas on why h e adopted theseni ches an d

.

pain t ed corn ices, will fi n d it i n t h e said biographer. Fr a Bartolom meo h ad often felt greatlydispleased with t h e j oin ers who prepared t h e frames an dexte rnal ornam ents of h i s pictures, for these m en h ad

t h e custom then as they have n ow , of con cealin g on e

e ighth of t h e picture by t h e projection of their fl ames ;h e determin ed, t herefore , to inven t some con trivance bywhich h e might b e en abled to di spense with these framesaltogether .”l This was to pain t a cornice round t h e

picture , or some work of archit ecture , in t h e middle of

which h e placed t h e figure ; an d this was easy work forhim who was so able in perspective , an d it heighten edt h e effect of t h e pain tin g. For thi s reason h e eschewedlandscape , i n which h e was deeply ski lled ?

V. Mr s . Foster ’s Tr an s . of Vasari .For a lon g tim e n o on e kn ew what h ad becom e of t h e picture of S .

Sebastian . M. Mar iette fan cied that i t was actually i n t h e possess ion of M.

Thiers. But S ign or Masselli h as com m un icated to m e t h e followin g partienlars i n a letter, da t ed Jun e, 1 848 —“M. Alatf re

,of Toulouse, im agin ed that

h e possessed t h e S. Sebastian by Fr a Bar t el. as it was sen t to Fran ce by


bold than otherwise . He seems to have comple ted t h ework of an Evangelist, an d to b e preparing him self t operform that of an Apostle an d Martyr , ready t o seal h i sdoctrine wi th h i s blood . So striki n g an d li fe-like is thisfigure , that we can almost fancy we see it risin g from t h e

chai r , in order t o speak . Some have called it a Greekstatue , transmuted into a painting , an d for my own part ,I recogn ise here more distin ctly than in an y other ofPorta’s works, h i s study of t h e an cient marbles .

l FatherDellaValle does not hesitat e to affirm that t h e S . Markby Fr a Bartolom m eo n eed not dr ead Raffaello’s Prophetin S . Augustin’s at Rom e .

” Moreover , here marks thatt h e attitude of t h e Evangelist i s far more beautiful an dte rrible ”2 Th is great work was executed by t h e Fri ar,for t h e church of San Marco , an d was placed over t h ee n trance-door of t h e choir , when t h e choir was i n t h e

m iddle of t h e church . Th e Syndic of t h e conven tmarked it as valued at forty ducats ; an d when boughtby Prin ce Ferdin an d , if Richardson b e correctly i nformed , i t cost crowns .

3 Carried to Paris at t h e

period of t h e Fren ch i n vasion , it was restored to Italyat t h e gen eral peace , an d was transferred from t h e panelto canvas . Th e two pai n tin gs that we have m entionedwere executed between t h e middle of 1 5 1 4 an d t h e

begin n in g of 1 5 1 5 .

1 I t h as been en graved by P. Loren z in i ; b ut t h e best en gravi n g of it i s tob e foun d i n t h e work en titled Galerie de Floren ce et da Palai s Pitti, desi n éepar G. B . W icar , Paris, Th e en gravin gs given by Bardi i n t h e Illustre t ien of t h e Pitti Gallery, an d by Ros in i i n h i s H istory of Pai n tin g, ar eon ly m ediocre.

3 See t h e edition of Vasari , published at M ilan , v. vi i i , p. 2 63 an d FatherDella Valle , w h o states th at ther e was a copy of i t i n S. Mar co, pai n ted byFran cesco Pet r n cci . I bel ieve that it i s n ow i n t h e A cadem y of Design .

3 Vol. 3 , Pt. 1 , page 1 2 6. Father Della Valle, loc. ci t , p. 2 7 1 .


CHAPTER VII .

Fr a Bartolom m eo goes to Lucca, Pi st oja an d Prato—Pai n ti n gs which h eexecuted i n these C ities— Return s t o Floren ce at t h e tim e of t h e vis it ofLeo X.

—Hi s health failin g, h e is obliged to go again to Pian di Magn on ean d Lecceto.

IT very frequen tly happens, in our intercourse withsociety, n ay, an d in t h e perusal of hi story, that we ar e

brought in to con tact with highly gifted gen i uses whohave so debased them selves by sordi d pursuits , as to makeus almost con clude , that n ot on e , but two , differen t soulsin form their bosoms —t h e on e most noble , rapt in t h econ tem plation of t h e True an d Beautiful , walkin g abroadi n t h e im m en sity of Heaven , an d en am oured of i ts glories—t h e other abject, crawlin g like a loathsome reptile i n

slime , an d batten ing on i t s impur ities,— so m uch so , thatyou knew n ot whether you should abomin ate or com passion at e those who have thus desecrated t h e choicest gifts ofGod . But wheresoever you discover a splen di d in tellect

,

dom iciled i n a holy breast , you,

must n eeds reveren cean d adm ire it, for it i s t h e reflex , not of an y merely hum anthi n g , but of di vin i ty itself. But that I m ay not di gressfrom m y subj ect , I will here say, that much as I haveadm ired t h e versatile gen ius, an d won derful ar t of Fr aGiovanni An gelico , an d Fr a Bar tolommeo , I have beenmuch more fascin ated by t h e exam ples which they gavet o their con temporaries in a most corrupt age . Wherefore ,havi n g always regarded Porta, as a pai nter, secon d tovery few , I have believed it t o b e my duty , not to


separate t h e artist from t h e citizen an d t h e monk ; an d,although t h e an cien t memoirs have left us i n darknessas to Fr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s in nerm ost life , I believe thatVasari h as writt en enough t o show t h e rare excellenceof our pain ter’s soul .Naturally given to solemn an d pious thought s , Portafound

,in t h e silence an d se clus ion of t h e Cloister , that

peace wh i ch i s t h e fi ui t of virt ue : nor is it easy for t h emere worldling to im agin e t h e arcan e an d in effabledelights which souls like h i s can fi n d in thi s solitaryperegrination of life . Such souls live n ot i n t h e actual ,but in t h e future , an d t h e mortified senses ar e no longerable t o check t h e spirit’s fli ght int o t h e sublim e regionsof inte lli gence an d love . En amoured of t h e Beautiful

, an d

contemplatin g it in all i t s varied relations , t h e min d, n ay,an d even t h e heart , elevat e themselves t o t h e fountainsour ce of all beauty, which i s God . It was thus that Portaraised ar t to t h e sanctity of prayer ; an d like t h e Doctorof Aquin o

,who regarded t h e investigation of t h e True as

a canticle of praise hymned to t h e Eternal , Fr aBartolomm eo held t h e same opinion , respecting everyimitat ion of t h e Beauti ful. Thus , t h e artist’s studi obecame a sanctuar y ; an d pai nting , t h e lan guage of an gels .

Often aft er fin i shing a picture of t h e Virgin , h i s soul wasfilled with t h e salutary thoughts of death ; an d thent aking up h i s lut e , h e im provised some pious strain , an dsang it to t h e accompan imen t of h i s instrumen t.‘ Atthat period, t h e Flor en t i n es t ook great pleasure inspiritual canticles ; an d even t h e fri ars, during t h e hoursof recreat ion , were wont to assemble an d blend t heir

Vasari says He fin ally arr ived at t h e wished-for power of aecompan yin g t h e labour of h is ha nds , w ith t h e un i n terrupted con tem plation ofdeath. On h i s return to Floren ce, h e applied him self tom usic

,an d taki n g gr eat delight In it ; h e som etim es san g for recreatio n .

”


exercise of h i s genius,an d was perfectly satisfied , provided

h e con tribut ed t o t h e suste n tation of h i s brotherhood . Inthese days of licen t iousness , when t h e great maj ority oft h e artists belon ging t o t h e religious orders cast off theirhabits , abandon ed t he cloister , an d lived abroad in t h etum ult an d uproar of t h e world ; Fr a Bartolomm eo , evento h i s latest hour , was a zealous observer of t h e lawst o wh i ch , like every other friar , h e h ad bound h im self bya solemn oath at t h e foot of t h e Altar . Man y celebrat edre ligious artist s of whom we Shall have occasion t o speak ,were as unlike him in this respect as day i s unlike n ight !Havi ng paid this brief tribut e to t h e mem ory of t h e

pious cenobite , le t us n ow continue t o speak of him as a

painter. It i s very likely t hat Fr a Bartolom meo se t ou t

early In 1 5 1 5 ,l for Lucca, to visit h i s dear fri en d Santi

Pagn i n i , who was then prior of t h e convent of SanRom an o .

2 It would appear that Pagn i n i , before com

ple t i n g t h e term of h i s priorat e , was anxious that Portashould pain t a great picture for this same church , whichalready possessed on e of h i s most exquisite works ; an dalthough all t h e ancien t memoirs of that con vent assertthat t h e expen ses of th i s picture , an d of t h e or n am en

t at ion s of t h e chapel for whi ch it was destined , weredefrayed by t h e friar Sebastian o Lam b ar di di Mon tecatin i , Father Ign atius Man an dr o , t h e Chr on icler of t h econ ven t , i s of opini on that Pagn i n i forwarded t h e worka t h i s ow n cost. Hen ce , we ar e to con clude that Mel

ch ior r eMi ssi ri n i was in error whe n h e wrote that Porta’sfam ous picture , kn own as t h e Virgin della Misericordia ,or del Patrocin io , was pai nted at t h e expense of a Ge n fa

Un der date Jun e 6, 1 5 1 5 , we have an en try of various sum s given by t h eSyn dic of t h e con ven t to Fr a Bartolom m eo.This celebrated Orien talist was elected Prior of San Rom an o i n Lucca,

either i n 1 5 1 3 or 1 5 1 5.


lon ier of Lucca, of t h e family de’ Montecat in i .

‘ Two ori

gi n al documen ts, which we gi ve i n a n ot e , prove Fr aSebastian o’s title to t h e proprietary of t h e picture ; but,in depen den tly of t h e two documents cited

,Mi ssi ri n i

might easi ly have learn ed from t h e cyphers wh i ch t h eartist in scribed on t h e embasem en t on which t h e Virgini s elevated, t h e in itials of t h e nam e of t h e party who engaged h im to execute t h e work .

2 I am assured, moreover , that n o such name as Mon tecati ni or Lam b ar di , i sto b e found in t h e series of t h e Gon faloniers of Lucca ;but , irrespective of t h e common tradi tion , which statesthat Lam b ar di invited Porta to paint this picture in Lop

peglia, a part of t h e Lucchese territory , whose churchwas then governed by Lam b ar do , we have an other reasonfor beli evin g it , wh i ch i s , that about this period Fr a Bart olom m eo was most certai n ly in Prato , Pi st oja, an d someof t h e other towns n ear Lucca.

To t h e glory of t h e Italian Art s, said An ton i oCanova, “we can point out two splendi d paintin gs , whichm ay b e sai d to have no parallels, if we consider t h e

Li b . Cron . Con v. S. Rom an i de Lucca, or d. Praed. com m en ced A .D . 1 52 5 .

Laudable is what I subjoi n , n am ely, t hat h e (Pagn in i ) assi st ed, perhaps ,by Fr a Sebastian o de’ Mon tecati n i

,r estored t h e ch apel whi ch is opposite to

t h e sacristy, ador n i n g it with m ar ble from Fiesole, with glass w in dows, an dplacin g ther ein wooden ben ches, an d what was still better an d gran der, decorati n g i t wi th t h e beauteous an d splen did pai n tin g which Fr a Bartolom m eoof our Order executed. Fr a Sebastian o expen ded on these works

,

about three hun dred gold cr own s.” Th e Syn dic of t h e con ven t of SanMarco, alludes t o i t thus, “ Item , a picture th at Fr a Sebasti an o de’ Mon tecati n i caused t o b e pain ted, whi ch was sen t t o our con ven t i n Lucca, valued at

about 2 3 0 ducats.”2 D i un quadro in sign e rappresen tan te la M. delle M isericordie di Fra

Bartolom m eo, e dell’ i n ci sion s esegui t an e da Giuseppe San ders. Fir en ze,1 83 4, per Leon ardo Ciardet t i .—Th e in itials ar e t h e followi n g, F. S. O. P .

(Fr ater Seb as t ian us 0r d. Pran d.) Alexan derVI. perm itt ed this Fr a Sebastian o to li ve outside h is clois t er. In 1 498

, h e was elect ed Pr ior of Loppeglia.

1 04 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS

en sem b le of their per fect ion s : t h e on e i s t h e magni ficentpicture of t h e Assum pt ion , by Tiziano , an d t h e other ist h e Virgi n della Misericordi a, by Fr a Bar t olom m eo.

”l

This pictur e i s about six-an d-a-half Floren tine bracciahigh , by four-an d-a-half wide . It i s semi-circular at

t h e summit, an d it contains forty-e ight figures, e ither halfor whole , large as life . Mazzar esa, who made it t h e sub

jec t of a second lett er , addressed t o Pietro Gi ordani , 2 2 n dSep t embe r, 1 82 8, speaks of it thus -“A m uli tude of t h efaithful , of every age , sex , an d condition ,

h as recourse toMary (wh o stands on a thron e in t h e cen tre) , supplicatin gHer to int ercede for them in their common affliction .

Mary , t h e Mother of mercies, as t h e words on t h e footstool indi cate , receives the ir prayers , an d, with hands an deyes raised t o heaven , invokes t h e di vine mercy on thosewho con fide In h er . n or in vain , because we behold , as itwere , i n a vision over h er , t h e merciful Lord , who 1 8

poised In t h e ai r . Hi s breast 1 s visible , an d t h e rest ofHi s body i s concealed by t h e clouds . We see , however,His naked side , an d t h e wound i s also perceptible , as t h ewind h as gently moved t h e cri mson robe with which t h epaint er h as most appropriat ely clothed Him . This figure ,with i t s ben i gnant expression of counten an ce an d ex

tended arms, most happily illustrates t h e wor ds on t h e .

little scroll , ‘Misereor super turbam .

’ Nothin g can b e

more beautiful than t h e disposition of t h e figures accordi n g t o sex an d age . Th e mothers , with the ir childr en ,ar e on t h e steps of t h e thron e ; t h e youn ger children ar e

behin d these , whilst angels hover over t h e whole group .

Each an d all of them have their eyes riveted on t h e

Virgi n , an d t h e adults an d old m en ar e at h er sides .

Three groups excel all t h e rest : on e of them stan ds at

Misi r i n i .


m ay use t h e phrase , to wring t h e yearned-for grace fromHim Here le t us observe that Christ IS visiblet o h er alon e , for sh e alon e h as h er eyes fixed on Him .

This was a m ost wise con ception , for it preserves t h e un ityof t h e action : an y other di spositi on m ust have been an

error, as Mary could n ot then b e t h e prin cipal object of

t h e picture , as was required of t h e pai n t er .Now

,if you con sider t h e tou t -en sem b le of this great

paintin g , an d all i t s part s, on e by on e , you will perceivethat I have not exaggerate d i n calli n g it stupen dous,an d fit to b e placed side by side with Raffaello’s Tran sfiguration

”1 And Mi ssi r i n i, after having described it

,

figure by figure , con cludes thus Here t h e excellenceof design , t h e prim ary an d substan t i al characteristic ofevery production of ar t , i s beyon d all praise . In everypar t of t h e picture we find true sublim i ty , n ay, an d

that in spiration with which t h e scen ery of a gorgeon s theatre i s calculated to overflood t h e soulhere t h e powerful expression pierces our bosom s an d

stirs them to their depth . How shall I describe t h e

movement s , attitudes, or t h e graceful flow of t h e dr a

per i es for which t h e Friar was so famous ? Whatshall I say of t h e vivid colourin g which is not sur

passed by Tizian o’s tin tings ? Th e shadows ar e di a

ph an ous, t h e opposition of t h e tin ts homogeneous , an dt h e effect of t h e chiaroscuro magi cal.

”2

1 Mazzarosa. Missi r in i . There are som e design s of this pain tin g executedby Porta

,w ith a pen , i n t h e gallery of t h e Ufii zj , at Floren ce.

2 Th e pain ter did n ot con ceal h is n am e,for h e i n scri bed it on t h e step of

t h e Virgi n ’s thron e,where we read , “M v . Frater Bartholom eus. ord . pr aed .

P ictor Floren tin us," Th is pai n t in g h as been en graved by San ders an d bySam uel jesi d i Correggio. Morghan would have en graved it, h ad h e n ot

bee n preven ted by death. Nocchi of Lucca. h as don e m e t h e kin dn ess of t h efollowi n g com m un ication In t h e last cen tury

,there was an other picture

b y Fra Bartolom m eo over t h e great altar of t h e church of S . Dom in ic, i n


These words of two such illustrious critics must term inat e our rem arks on thi s pain ti n g. I will m erely observe ,that if Porta, in fluen ced , no doubt , by Michelan giolo ,som etimes bordered on exaggeration i n design , h e was

also sometim es crude in h i s tin tin gs , an d , perhaps, somewhat ignoble i n t h e expression of h i s heads . In th i spaint ing, in San Romano at Lucca,

’

t is easy to recognizet h e tone of Venetian colouring , un ited to t h e gr an diosestyle ofMichelangiolo , an d adorned with t h e gracefuln essof Raffaello . Here there i s not t h e slight est exagger at ion , if we except t h e nude of t h e children , an d t h e movemen t s ar e perfectly un con strained ; whilst t h e attitudesan d arrangem ent of t h e drapery m ay b e pron ounced faultless . Although t h e picture of S . Catherin e an d S . MaryMagdalene , that h e executed a few year s before for t h esam e church , pleases m e more , I will n ot den y that this ,in all that regards colouring, i s on e of t h e m ost marvellous works produce d by t h e Friar of San Marco .

On h i s way back to Floren ce it seems that Fr a Bartolom m eo t arried som e time in t h e cities of Pi st oja an d

Prato . Wheresoever h e wen t, h e was won t to leavesom e monument of h i s gen ius ; an d bein g request ed byh is fri ends of t h e convent of San Domen ico , inPi st oja, t obequeath them some remin i scen ce , h e paint ed a Virgin ,

wi th t h e In fan t i n h er arms, on t h e in tern al wall of t h emonastery . This pict ure , execut ed i n 1 669 , was, sub se

quently , sawed off t h e wall an d placed i n t h e church over

t h e sam e city. I t represen ted S. Dom i n ic stan din g on t h e st ep of a m arblet hr on e, on whi ch three n un s were kn eelin g on ei ther side of h im . Th e Sain theld t h e rules of h i s Order an d t h e ci ty i n h is left han d, whi lst h e blessed t h esisters with h i s right. Two an gels bor e t h e train of t h e holy patri arch. Thiswork

, whi ch i s sai d to b e i n Porta’s pur est style, was rem oved to t h e in ter iorof t h e m on astery ; an d a pict ure by S ister Aurelia Fi or en ti n i, a Dom in icanpain tress, h as been substituted for it.”

1 08 151 13 31 01 11 3 or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

t h e altar of t h e Fior avan t i .‘ When I saw it in 1 844 ,though much in jured , especially in t h e under part , itappeared to m e to b e very beautiful an d gr acefi i l ; an d Ifoun d i n it a suavity of pencillin g which does not charact eri se t h e generality of this art ist

'

s frescos.

So near to h i s own coun try, Fr a Bartolom meo couldnot forge t h i s n atal soil , that hum ble village of Savign an o ,where h i s childhood sped an d where t h e bon es of h i sfathers were mouldering . Th e author of t h e Bi b liogr aphy of Prat o , on whose works we have drawn so largely ,left us t h e followin g n otice of Porta’s visit to Prato an d i t sn eighbourhood : it i s taken from Mart i ni’s Miscellanee .

”

We will give it in i t s in tegrity an d simplicity, for wecould not heighten t h e effect of a n arr ative recordi ng on e

of these incidents that so swee ten weary life— t h e warmgreetin gs of kinsmen after lon g years of absen ce .

Fr a Bartolommeo came to Last rucci a wi th anotherFriar of S . Domini c

’

s Order , an d aft er staying some t imewith h i s uncle Giust o , when h e was on e day standi n gunder an oak near a little fountain , Fagolo di Vite , a childof about

,nin e or t en years bein g present , Fr a Bart o

lom m eo said : Giust o , h ad you not a nephew wh o be camea friar Yes ,

’ replied Giusto ; an d then Fr a’

Bar t olom m eo

asked : Ifyou saw him would you know h im Whereon,

Giusto replied , ‘You ar e h e 1’

an d then they em braced an drecognized each other as kin sm en . Th is was Fr a Bart olom m eo

’

s uncle ; an d when t h e friar was about to depart ,h e said to Giusto , ‘It m ay b e a lon g time ti ll I see youagain , for t h e Kin g of France h as sent for m e , as h e

wants m e t o execute some works for h im .

’ This I haveh ad from t h e lips of Fagolo di Vite , who was a labourerin t h e employment of Andrea Com par i n i . Said Fagolo

Fran cesco Tolom ei,Giuda di Pistoja.

1 1 0 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

historian of our artistic antiquities, acknowledges h i s ign orance of i t s vicissitudes .

‘ Lanzi writes that h e saw in thepossession of t h e Marqui s Acci auoli a picture of t h eAssumption , t h e upper part of which was pain ted byPorta, an d t h e under by Mariot to Alb er t i n elli ; an d h ethinks it to have been that which Fr a Bartolom meo execu t ed for Prato ; 2 but Alb er t i n elli was dead in 1 5 1 6 .

Cesare Guasti , t h e author of t h e Pratese Bibliography,at first thought that it h ad been removed to Vien n a ;but h e , subsequen tly, corrected t h e error, an d con fessedhimself un acquai n ted with i t s location ; h e , doubtless,con founded it with t h e Presentation in t h e Tem plethat i s st ill i n t h e Imperial city. My own researches ,however, have brought t h e following facts to li ghtDur ing t h e days of t h e fatal innovation s introduced byScipion e Ricci , bishop of Prato an d Pi st oja , t h e churchof San ta Maria , in Caste llo , at Prato , was suppressed .

Now this church possessed a pain ting by Fr a Bar t olomm eo ofMary taken up into Heaven . Sh e was habited ina flowin g robe , an d ben eath h er was an urn or sepulchr ewith flowers, an d on h er right was t h e Baptist

, an d on

h er left , S . Catherin e , Virgin an d Martyr . This painti n g was in t h e custody of t h e person presidin g over t h ehospital of Prato . When Gin i was Admin istrator of t h eRoyal Ecclesiastical Patrimon y of said city

,it was

sold to Giulio Porrini , Chan cellor of Floren ce , for t h esum of s ix dolla r s . Por i n i sold it to an En glishman

1 As there i s n o m en tion of this picture i n t h e catalogue com piled by t h eSyn dic of t h e con ven t i n 1 5 1 6, we in f er that itwas executed som e m on thslater.Hist. of Pain ti n g, Floren tin e School, secon d Epoch. If this work ex

h i b i t s traces of two differen t pai n ters, we m ay con jecture that Porta wasassisted at i t by Fr a Paolin o da Pis t oja. It is certain that h e avai led him selfof h i s servi ces durin g t h e last periods of h i s life.

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECTS . 1 1 1

i n Florence for a hun dr ed zecchin i , an d this En glishm ansold it to Mr . Milton for a hun dred an d fifty zecchi ni ;fin ally , Pius VI . purchased it from Milton

,givin g h im

more than three thousand Roman crowns for this m asterpiece by our Friar . l It was at last carried off from Romedurin g t h e invasion , an d i s n ow i n t h e Royal Museum at

Berlin ; as M . Rio , relyin g perhaps on t h e authority ofLan zi , t ells us that t h e Assum ption i n that gallery wasexecut ed partly by Br a Bartolomm eo , an d partly byMarietto Alb er t i n elli .2

For h i s conven t of San Domenico , at Prato , our fri arexecut ed two little pictur es, on e of which represen t s t h ehead of Jesus, an d t h e other, that of t h e Virgin , valuedat five ducats. Th e catalogue com piled by t h e Syn dicof t h e Con vent m en tions them both . Towards t h e e n d

of sum mer, or t h e begi n nin g of t h e autum n of 1 5 1 5 , Fr aBartolom m eo return ed to Floren ce , an d un dertook somen ew an d importan t works. Th e picture of t h e AngelicalSalutation ,

now i n t h e Louvre , was produced i n thisyear . Rio praises th i s work for t h e poetical an d i m aginative con ception of Fr a Bartolom meo , who , in stead of

painti n g h er kn ee ling, an d saluted by t h eAngel , represent sh er seated on a thron e , surroun ded by som e Sain ts , an d

rece ivin g t h e tidin gs of t h e great myst ery .

3 I will here

I am i n debted t o Sign or Guasti for this n otice which is partly extractedfrom a letter, an d partly fr om a work by Marchetti (Th e Pac ific An n otation scon firm ed by t h e n ew Pastoral of t h e bishop of Pi st oja an d Prato

,&c.

,

Father Mus car ia, a Basili an Mon k,utters t h e followin g in vective

again st t h e said bishop — “ You have aston ished Rom e by your heroiczea l—you wh o sold for a con tem ptible sum t h e pai n tin g of t h e Ma

don n a della cin tura, by t h e celebrated Dom in i can , Fr a Bar tolom m eo dellaPorts—you di d thi s, an d t h e Pope h as r epurchased that fam ous picture forthree thousan d dolla rs !

3 Rio, Poesie, Ch r et ien n e, chap. ix . p. 3 73 , n ote.

3 Rio,loc . cit., p. 3 83 .

1 1 2 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS,

observe , t hat if this picture b e really an An nunciation,

wh i ch I doubt, t h e pain ter h as chosen a very bizarremode of express ing it. Th e next n otice that we have of

Porta, descri bes h im on ce more i n t h e hospice of S .

Maria Maddalena, in Pian di Mugn on e , pain tin gAnnunciation i n t h e li ttle church of t h e religious . It i s avery pretty little work , an d t h e figures ar e small .Perhaps it was durin g this period that h e painted,obscure part of t h e clois ter, a head of Jesus of Nazareth ;an d over t h e door of t h e sam e cloister , half figures of S .

Dom in ic an d S . Francis em bracin g . These two figuresar e admirable for gran deur of manner , t h e softn ess an d

harmony of t h e tints , an d t h e great relief of t h e design .

Every touch of t h e pencil , i n this composition , i s boldan d free .

Florence was n ow preparin g for t h e visit of Leo X . ,

an d t h e Republic invi t ed all i t s m ost di stin guished artist st o dedi cate them selves to t h e solemn ization of this mostj oyful event. Th e imitative ar ts were n ow to do hom ageto t h e Pon tiff, who so signally fostered an d prot ectedthem . An drea del Sarto , Aristo t ile da S . Gallo ,Gr an acci , Rosso , San sovi no , Baccio Bandi nelli , Baccio daMonte Lupo , all were now m e t t o vi e with each other inthese imm ortal works , which Vasari describ es i n h is lifeof An drea del Sarto . As t h e Pon tiff was to hold h i scourt in t h e conven t of S . Maria Nove lla, t h e Republiccommission ed Pon torm o to execute some frescos i n t h e

privat e chapel where h i s Holin ess was to ofi i ciat e ; an dit also en gaged Ridolfo del Ghirlan daj o to pain t a pictur efor t h e sam e chapel , an d to design all t h e decorations forit, as well as for t h e Pon t ifical apartmen t. Fr aBar t olomm eo della Porta was not employed to execute an y

On t h e 3 0t h of November, 1 5 1 6 , two hours before


canonizat ion . We regard t hi s condescension of h i sHoliness as very remarkable , since h e positively refusedto visit t h e other religious orders who m em or i aled h im

for that purpose . It now remains for us t o speak of t h ePresen tation of t h e Infan t Jesus in t h e Temple .

Many persons , through ignorance of t h e h i story , havestrangely confounded t h e Circumcision with t h e Pr e

se n t at i on in t h e Temple . Porta , however, h as shown h i mself t o have been well acquain tedwith that legal ceremony,an d h e therefore con fin ed him self within t h e limits oft ruth . In th i s pain tin g there ar e six figures of t h en atural M en si on s. He placed t h e Priest in t h e centre ,standing on a st ep of t h e temple , an d holdi n g t h e nudeInfant in h i s arms . On h i s right, i s S . Joseph st andin g ;on t h e left , i s t h e Virgin ; an d prostrate at t h e feet of t h epriest, an d between h i m an d S . Joseph , i s t h e prophetessAnna. Th e ceremon y is performed within a precin ct oft h e t emple , which t h e pain t er h as drawn in very sim plearchit ecture . Simeon , venerable in age an d aspect , an dsomewhat bent by years , seem s to b e in vi gorated by t h elon g-expect ed revelation , wh i ch permit s h i m to clasp t h eLiberator in h i s arms. Th e coun ten ance , an d wholeperson of t h e Virgin , in dicate in eff able t en dern ess ; an d

while plac in g t h e In fan t i n Sim eon’s arm s, sh e so followsHim with h er eyes , as though sh e could n ot , for a sin glein stan t , lose sight of t h e Heaven -sent Babe . Th e pain terrepresen t s h er i n t h e act of gen tly pressin g t h e Infan t’sright foot

, as t h ough sh e mean t to j oin it to t h e left , whichHe playfully raises. Joseph , who is on t h e right, an dopposite to t h e Virgin , seem s grave an d thoughtful .Noth i n g can b e m ore marked than t h e con trast betweenh im an d h i s youthful spouse , whose counten an ce is

radi ant wi th tenderness an d affection . En veloped i n a

flowin g robe h e stret ches out h i s right hand , in which h e


holds t h e votive doves , whilst h e presses h i s left to h i sbosom . Although t h e prophetic Sim eon h as n ot ye t

revealed to t h e Mother t h e m ultiplied woes thr oughwhich h er Son was destin ed to pass, as we m ay collectfr om t h e j oyful counten an ces of them both , Joseph ,nevertheless , seems to b e overwhelmed by some gloomyan ticipation .

An n a, supern ally in formed of t h e divin ity of t h e Infant ,devoutly prostrates herself before Him , im plor ing an d

receivin g Hi s ben edi ction . Behind h er i s a m aiden whoseem s to have com e to witn ess t h e sacred function . Thesefigures ar e of beautiful design ; an d we wi ll barely speakof i t , as it h as n ot been our good fortune to see t h e

origi n al ; in deed , t h e copy that we have seen i s on lym ediocre . Th e figure of Sim eon would b e truly beautiful , were it n ot somewhat defective i n t h e foreshorten in g—an effect produced , no doub t ,

'

b y t h e am plitude of t h ed raperies. Th e light gracefuln ess of t h e Virgin m akesthis still more apparen t ; an d , as sh e i s t h e tallest figur ei n t h e en tire com position , t h e eye n ever tires of con templatin g h er . An n a

, t h e prophetess, would have beenbetter located elsewhere ; for , as all t h e figures ar e i n

on e lin e , sh e h as som e difficulty i n seein g t h e Infan t, an dsimilar difficu lty atten ds Him whilst givin g t h e blessin g .

There can b e n o doubt that this i s t h e action which t h eartist desi red to represen t . Wherefore it occurs to us

that t h e figures i n t h e little picture of t h e circumcision ,

n ow i n t h e gallery of t h e Uffi zj , ar e better grouped an ddisposed .

1 Let u s fin ally observe , that t h e drapery ofall t h e figures i s n atural an d grand . Father della Valle ,

In t h e sam e gallery there is a little copy of this sam e Presen tation,by

t h e han d of B a Bartol. , about a palm an d a half high . I t differs a littlefrom t h e origin al ; b ut it h as been in jur ed by r etouchin g, an d t h e colourin g


who saw t h e original whilst it was st ill in t h e novitiat eof San Marco , stat es, t hat t h e following inscription , dated1 5 1 6 , was at foot of it Orat e pro pict or e olim Sacellih ujus alumno .

” This alludes to t h e period when Fr aBartolommeo , aft er return i ng from Prato , made a shortsoj ourn there , an d this is t h e reason why Della Vallestates t hat Bar tolom m eo took t h e habit , not i n Prato , butin San Marco , at Florence .

1 Th e pictur e of t h e Present at i on was ultim ately removed to t h e Im perial Galleryof Vienn a, an d t h e novit iate of San Marco retai n s onlya very indi f feren t copy, i n whi ch Porta allowed somemodifications to b e in troduced .

2

Before speakin g of t h e pai n tin g dated 1 5 1 6 , perhapswe ought to have men tion ed a picture of great dim en ~

sions an d rarest merit ; but as t h e year in which it wasproduced is n ot specified on t h e work , we have thoughtth i s t h e fitting place t o describe it. I t cert ain ly belongsto our friar ’s lat est manner , an d was execut ed towards t h eclose of t h e year 1 5 1 6 ; n ay, even before t h e two paintin gs alr eady alluded to , t hat i s to say, t h e Assumption at

Prat o , an d t h e Presen tation n ow in Vien na ; for t h elatt er ar e not specified in t h e catalogue com piled byt h e Syndic of t h e convent of San Marco (AD ,

whereas , it makes distinct menti on of t h e Saviour Risen ,which we wi ll now describe .

Salvator Billi , a Floren tine merchant, h ad employedPiet ro Rosselli to adorn h is chape l in t h e church of t h e

is m uch dam aged. Th e great picture of t h e n ovitiate h as been splen didlyen graved by Perfetti an d Lauger i n t h e work en titled Galerie Im perialeRoyale eu Belvider e a Vien n e, pub liee par Charles Haas, Vien n e et Pr ague,1 82 1 .

Note to Vasari . Ediz . dei C lassi ci di M ilan o, vol. vn .

I do n ot kn ow t h e author of this copy. In t h e t acy of San Marcot h e or igin al desi gn s of th is work are st ill preserved.


an d were placed i n t h e gallery of t h e Uffizj , in an apartment which , for a while , was kn own as t h e Hall of t h eFriar .” It was a tribute of respect offered by h i s countryt o t h e m an whose pen cil shed such lustre on it. Th eprophets ar e n ow in t h e tribune , an d have for the irvi s a-vi s two obscen e Ven uses !In t h e cen tre of t h e picture h e paint ed Chr ist Risen .

He stan ds majestically on an em basem en t,holdin g t h e

cross in Hi s left han d, wh i lst Hi s right i s in t h e act of

blessin g . He i s n ude , or but partly covered by a whi teveil. Ar oun d Him ar e t h e four Evan gelists in t h e act ofdiscoursin g on their evan gelical mission . At t h e foot oft h e base on wh i ch t h e Redeemer stan ds

,h e pain ted , in a

little circle , a sm all lan dscape of such exqui sit e beauty ,that it m akes us regret h i s aban don m en t of thi s style ofpain tin g. Over this orn am entation i s t h e Chalice , t h ecom pendium of religion ; for preachin g , symbolized byt h e Apostles , an d t h e Eucharist typified by t h e Chalice ,comprise an d em brace t h e whole doctrin e of Jesus Christ.Th e circle on which t h e chalice rest s , i s sustained by twon ude an gels , so beautiful , so graceful , an d so exquisite lycoloured , that they ar e n ot in ferior to those i n t h e firstpictur e of S . Luke . Th e com position of thi s work i ssimple , an d well defin ed . Placin g Jesus Chr ist betweent h e Prophets an d t h e Apostles , h e showed how t h e twoTestament s were un ited in Hi s person , an d that He i s t h e

an gular ston e upon which t h e mystic edi fice of t h e

Catholic Church i s built . In t h e inferior part of t h epicture , that Is , i n t h e five figu r es already described, Ithin k t h e desig

nexhibits t races of mannerism , an d a cer

tain con strain t i n t h e movemen ts . Th e colour in g , t oo , i sinferior to that of t h e two Prophets . I should , perhaps,have observed , that t h e figures of Job an d Isaias ar e b e tterpreserved ; whereas , t h e rest have suffered sadly from


time an d retouchin g . I do not agree with Borgh i n i , whosays that t h e figures in t h e under part of t h e picture ar e

somewhat too much shorten ed , but I think that t h eheavin ess of t h e robing m akes them appear a littleunfin ished .

Our Friar received on e hundred gold ducats for thiswork

, as t h e Syn dic of t h e conven t informs us. Cardin alCarlo de’ Medici purchased it from t h e Servite Fathersi n 1 61 8, an d left them a copy of it , which som e im aginewas executed by Em poli ; whereas, Bottari asserts that itwas by Dom en ico Pugli an i . Th e original, wh i ch was

at first rem oved to t h e Cardi nal’s casin o , was afterwardstran sported to t h e Pitti palace , an d , fin ally, alon g wi tht h e S . Mark , to Paris, in 1 799 . Both these paintin gsremain ed fourt een years i n t h e Louvre , whi ch , li ke t h e

Pinacoteca of Verres an d Mum m i us, was enrichedwith t h e spoils of all Europe ; an d t h e Italian s

,like

t h e Greeks, h ad reason to com plain that t h e Con querordi d not leave them even t h e images of their divin ities .

Than ks t o Can ova’s love of Father-lan d , these an d otherobjects of Art were restored to Italy in 1 81 4 .

Not havin g t h e opportun e notices, an d not knowin gt h e true epoch , we thin k it was about th i s period thatFr a Bartolom m eo m ade an excur sion to t h e herm itageof Lecceto , belon gi n g to t h e Con gregation of San Marco .

This herm itage,that resem bled a small convent, was

situated in t h e Com m un e of San Martino , at Gan galan di ,n ot far fi om Malm an tile , on t h e road to Pisa. Leccetotakes i t s designation from t h e ilexes i n which t h e regionabounds .

‘ Professor Mi cheli , t h e Floren t ine painter ,

l A certain father Guerrier i, a r eligion s of t h e con ven t of San Mar co, wh oh ad been a disciple of S . An ton in o, desi r in g to lead an erem itical life,obtain ed faculties from h i s superiors t o petition t h e com m un ity of Gan galan difor a spot i n t h e wood, that h e m i ght b ui ld ther e a little herm itage, n n de


who visited it i n 1 843 , i n forms m e that h e found t h e

an cient Hospi ce reduced t o t h e condi tion of a sm allcolony ; t h e be lfry i n a state of rui n : t h e church i n fairpreservati on , an d of beauti ful archi t ecture . It con tainsa stupen dous paintin g by Domen i co del Ghirlan daj o

,

t h e inscription on which states that t h e Strozzi familycaused i t to b e execut ed . In t h e int erior of t h e Hospiceh e di scovered a Deposition from t h e Cross , pain ted byFr a Bartolom m eo ; an d on two tiles, made fast i n t h e

wall , two heads of Jesus of Nazareth , by t h e same art is t.These works m ay have been executed i n t h e sum m er orautumn of an d it was probably about t h e sameperiod that h e design ed , in oil , i n t h e house of Pier delPugliese , t h e arm ed figure of S . George , Slaying t h e

serpent. Findin g it noticed by t h e Syndic of t h e

con ven t, am ongst Porta

’

s un finished works , I think wem ay in fer that it belongs to t h e year 1 5 1 6 .

CHAPTER VIII .

Last Pain tin gs of Fr a Bartolom m eo—His Death an d Eulogy—His Design san d h i s Pupils.

WE now approach t h e term of Fr a Bar t olom m eo’

s

earthly career ; an d we grieve to think that h i s preciousdays were so few ; an d that regret i s heightened by t h e

t h e i n vocation of Our Lady of t h e Assum ption . Hi s prayer was gran ted i n1 475 , an d t h e S trozzi fam ily assi sted h im i n rai sin g t h e little edi fice, whichsubsequen tly was con verted in to a Hospice for t h e Dom in i can s. An n alee,

S . Marci.Un der date, Decem ber 2 3 , 1 5 1 6, we fin d, i n t h e Ar chives of San Mar co,

an ackn owledgm en t from a pain ter called Fran cesco di Filippo di An ton iodi R idolfo, of t h e sum of t en gold ducats, len t to h im by Fra Bartolom m eo.M iscellan ea, No. 2 .


on t h e Guide-Books of Floren ce , which attribute to Fr aBartolomm eo works that ar e not h i s . We will nowspeak of t h e pain tin gs which h e fin i shed , an d then of

such as h e left im perfect, an d which m ay b e regarded asposterior to t h e others . In t h e Hospice of S . MariaMaddalen a

,i n Pian di Mugnon e , a spot that h ad peculiar

attractions for h im,h e executed a beautif ul fresco in

1 5 1 7 , t h e last year of h i s morta l term . In a little chapeln ear t h e entran ce , h e pain ted ou r Lord appearin g toMary i n t h e sem blan ce of a garden er . In a verdurelesstract of coun try you b ehold t h e sepulchre hollowed int h e m oun tain

,which shuts out t h e perspective on on e

side . Two figur es of life-size ar e t h e on ly objectsperceptible on t h e super fici es. Th e holy an d enam ouredpeniten t h as just recogn ized h er beloved Lord , an d sh e

seem s to b e overwhelm ed with affection . Her left kn eei s ben t to t h e earth , an d h er right han d rests on a stone ,whereon i s in scribed I have foun d him whom mysoul loveth . Nothin g could have better expressedt h e in n ermost soul of t h e pain ter, than these words fromt h e Can ticle . Th e coun ten an ce (an d we see on ly t h eprofile) of Magdalen e

,i s very beautiful : h er attitude

,

facile an d spon tan eous ; an d t h e folds of t h e draperies ar eexquisite beyon d description . Th e Redeem er i s semin udc , an d clothed i n a white ve il , resem blin g that i n t h epicture executed for Salvatore Billi . He holds an

agricultur al im plemen t i n Hi s left hand , an d seem s torepel Magdalen e with Hi s right, whilst t h e ben ign an texpression of Hi s coun ten an ce com forts an d con soles h er .

Th e figure of t h e Redeem er , i n m y judgm en t, i s n ot

Lo rd appeari n g t o Magdalen e, as t h e garden er ; this i s executed i n h is fi r stm an n er, an d i s m uch in fer ior to h i s other works ; i t i s dam aged by r etouchi n g . Th e Baldell i possess a Holy Fam ily

,which eviden tly belon gs t o Porta’s

earliest pe r i od , after h e h ad left Cosim o Rossell i.

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S . 1 2 8

sufficiently ven erable.

an d celestial ; for , indeed , Hisyouthfuln ess , earthly beauty, attitude , an d sem i-n udelim bs , do n ot im press us with a fittin g idea ofHi s glori ousResurr ection . This work h as already suffered m uchfrom t h e action of dam p , an d I fear that t h e place inwh i ch it actually i s, m ust ultimately ruin it . In t h e

same chur ch , n ear t h e en tran ce-door, Fr a Bartolom m eo

pain ted (i n a n iche) a Crucifixion , an d MaryMagdaleneem bracin g t h e Cross ; an d on e ither side , i n t wo circles ,two heads of Dom in ican Sain ts . Tim e that h as alm ostentirely destroyed t h e other figures, h as n ot yet touchedthat of Magdalen e , which i s still m ost charmi n g an d

graceful . Alas ! it, too , m ust soon perish !We m ay n ow en um erate some frescoes which h e

executed i n h i s con ven t of San Marco , an d which m ayb e classed am on gst h is latest works . In t h e chapel DELG IOVANATO there i s a Madon n a with t h e In fan t i n h erarms, cruelly in jured by t h e sawin g of t h e w all

,whe n

they were rem ovin g this, alon g with other works byPor ta

,to t h e Gallery of t h e Academ y of Design . This

fre sco i s i n h i s en larged style , an d exceeds t h e n aturalproportion s. In t h e sam e chapel , probably i n t h e circlesroun d t h e altar , it i s very likely that h e pain ted t h e t enheads of t h e sain ts

,that ar e n ow i n t h e foresaid gallery .

Eight of them were executed i n fr esco an d two i n oil ;amon gst them was t h e portrait of Savon arola i n t h e guiseof S . Peter martyr, less faithfully delin eated than t h e

pictur e n ow possessed by Sign or Rub i er i i n Prato . Th e

Floren tin e Academ y also possesses two Virgin s with t h edivi n e In fan t , which h e pain ted on t h e wall. They ar e

m arked , n um ber 44 . These works,i n m y opin ion , ar e

n ot rem arkable for gracefuln ess or accuracy i n theirdetails ; so we con ten t ourselves w ith barely m en tion in gthem . But n othin g can excel t h e per fection of t h e four

1 2 4 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERs ,

half figures of t h e Domin ican sain ts that h e painted int h e in feri or dormitory, over t h e entrance t o t h e schoolsof t h e conven t of San Marco . In boldness an d fr eedomof pen cillin g , not t o speak of t heir shading, they surpassevery other that h e execut ed in this style . Most worthyof not ice i s t h e S . Thomas of Aquin o an d anot h erDominican saint , whose heads seem to speak .

1

Of t h e unfin i shed pain ti n gs I will m en tion b u t t h r ee .

Th e Assum ption,n ow i n t h e church of San ta Maria del

Sasso , was design ed by Fr a Bar tolomm eo , an d colouredby Fr a Paolino — a Deposition fr om t h e Cross, 3 pict ureof t h e middle size , over t h e grand altar of t h e litt lechurch of t h e Dominicans in Pian di Mugnone , alongwith t h e usual figures of t h e Virgin an d Magdalene , contain s S . John , S . Domi nic , an d S . Thom as of Aqui no .

When t h e original was removed to t h e Florent ineAcademy, it was subst itut ed by a very beaut i ful copyby an unknown hand. Fr a Bartolommeo mer ely outlined this painting, an d left t h e colouring of it to Fr aPaolino .—Th e third i s t h e gr and painti n g t hat wasintended for t h e Coun cilHall , an d, as we have said , it wascomm enced i n 1 5 1 2 .

If not all, certai n ly some of these works might havebeen begun by Fr a Bartolommeo in t h e sprin g of 1 5 1 7 .

In t h e summer of this year h e set out for t h e baths ofSan Filippo

, wi th t h e hope of ben efitin g h is health ; but,alas , they did him little good ! On h i s retur n t o Florenceh e resumed t h e grand pain t ing for t h e Council Hall , as

l Ci n elli says,that i n t h e refectory of San Marco there i s a Blessed Virgi n ,

together wi th .a S. Dom in i c an d S . Catheri n e of S ien a, by Fr a Bartolom m eo,

an d also a S. Vin cen t Fer rer, by t h e sam e han d. (Bellezze di Fir en ze, p.We have n o other accoun t of these pai n tin gs. Th e S . Vin cen t was

i n t h e passage leadi n g to t h e sacristy. I have n ot ascertain ed wheth er Fr aBartol. pai n ted two fi gures of this sai n t.

1 2 6 MEMOIR S or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

m ast er h ad entirely completed t h e design of t h e picture ,when , in consequence of havin g laboured perpe tuallybeneath a win dow , t h e rays of wh ich poured con stan tlyon h i s back , on e side of h i s body became paralysed , an dh e could not m ove h i mself. He was , therefore , advisedby h i s physician to proceed to t h e baths at San Fi lippo ;but

, although h e remained there a con siderable tim e , h e

became but very little better . Fr a Bartolom m eo was a

great lover of fruit, fi n di n g t h e flavour particularly

grateful to him , although it was exceedin gly in j urious t oh i s health ; wherefore , on e m ornin g, having eaten veryplen tifully of figs, h e was attacked, in additi on t o h i s

previ ous m alady , with a violen t access of fever, whichfin ished t h e course of h i s life in four days, an d when h eh ad attained t h e age of forty-e ight year s ; h e re t ainedh is con sciousn ess t o t h e last, an d with hum ble trustresigned h i s soul to heaven . Th e death of Fr a Bar

Bar tolom m eo's portrait. Cam i llo Pucci , of Sarzan a, a very disti n guished

pai n ter, h as gi ven m e t h e followin g artisti c criticism of thi s work If we

take t h e subject an d desti n ati on of t h e picture in to accoun t, I bel ieve thatChristian ar t does n ot possess an y pain tin g gr an der or m ore solem n than th isi n fact, there i s n o other so sever e an d varied i n i t s sym m etry

,m ore barm o

n i ous i n i t s lin es, or m or e beautiful for i t s archite ctural groun d. Th e

disposition of t h e groups an d figures, an d t h e i n di vidual character of each ofthem ,

is adm irably calculated to im press t h e m in d with a profoun d n otion of

i t s gran deur an d m agn ificen ce, an d it com prises t h e m ost won der ful elem en tsof t h e ar t of t h e three supr em e m asters, Lion ardo, Raff aello, an d An gelo. In

t h e cen tral gr oup we easily recogn ise t h e fin i sh an d suavity of t h e Lion ar desquestyle, n ay, even t h e m an n er of t h e com posi t ion rem in ds us of t h e fam ouscartoon of S ta. An n a, by that celebrated m an to whom Fr a Bartol. didhom age i n this h i s last work, as h e com m en ced h i s pictorial career bystudyi n g h is des ign s. Who wi ll n ot r ecogn ise h i s ven eration for Buon ar ot t ii n t h e bold attitude of these figures, an d t h e en ergy which characteri sesthese extr em i t ies ? As for t h e glor ia over t h e D ivin e In fan t, an d t h e

ch ildren wh o s i t on t h e steps an d sin g, we regard them as i n spi red by t h e

graceful an d delicate m a n n er of Raffaello This pain tin g, form erly i n t h echapel of Ot t . de'Medici, in S. Loren zo, h as been rem oved to t h e gallery oft h e Ufli zj .

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S. 1 2 7

t olom m eo caused in fin ite grief to h i s frien ds , but m orepar ticularly to t h e m on ks of h i s Order , who gave h i mhon ourable sepultur e i n San Marco

,on t h e 8th of

October, 1 5 1 7” 1

Hi s death at such an imm atur e period , an d i n t h e

meridian of h i s glory, was regarded by every on e as a

calam ity ; for in h im Ar t lost a gran d m aster,society a

spotless citizen, an d t h e Cloister a tr uly religious brother .

Less fort un ate than Fr a Giovan n i An gelico,h e h ad n o

patron to raise a m on umen t or in scribe an epitaph , whichwould te ll post erity where all that earthly of h immouldered. Withal , I would say, that Porta died at a

happy m omen t , for h e di d not li ve to see h i s countryenslaved by a mon ster, or to witn ess t h e terrible di sast ersthat , at a subsequen t period , rain ed down on Italy.

Had h e lived a few days lon ger , h e m ust have heardt h e fearful cry of Reformation ” thun derin g i n h i s earsfrom distan t Germ any ! 2 Som e of Fr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s

fri en ds dictated t h e followin g eulogy , wh i ch h as bee npreserved by Vasari in h i s first edition of t h e Lives of

t h e Pain ters , Sculptors , an d Ar chi tec t s

In colourin g,Appelles

,i n design

I rivalled Buon ar r ot t i ; n ay, surpassedEven n ature in to all m y form s I castSuch stren gth, life, m otion , flesh, bon e, outward-shin e .

” 3

How changed were tim es sin ce t h e days o f t h e

See Vasari’s Lives, etc.— V. Docum en t.

2 On t h e last day of October, 1 5 1 7 , Luther publi shed h is Theses again stI n dulgen ces at W i r t em b erg .

3 Tran s . by Rev. J. Ken yon , P.P. We subjoin t h e origin al“ Appelle n el colore

, e’l Buon ar r oto

Im itai n el disegn o ; e la n atur aVin si , dan do vigor

’

n ogn i figur aE carn e, e ossa, e pelle, e spirti, e m ot e .

”


Angelico ! Th e epitaph on that most pious arti st’ssepulchre t old n ot how h e h ad rivalled Zeuxis or

Apelles i n pain tin g , but how h e bestowed on t h e poort h e living im ages of Chri st—all that h e h ad earned byt h e exercise of h i s penci l ; an d how t h e heavens n‘owpossessed that soul whi ch h ad shadowed forth t h e sem

blan ces of t h e blessed here below. Th i s was a eulogiumbefitti n g a Christian pai nter. Fr a Bartolomm eo , t i s t rue ,did not equal h i m i n artistic power, but h i s vir t ues wereakin to these of t h e Angelico ; an d t h e con temporaries oft h e friar of San Marco bestowed on h i m not hing morethan t h e praise h e deserved , when they summ ed up allh is excellences in t h e few words, Into all h i s forms h ecast

Str en gth, li fe, m otion , flesh, bon e, outward-shin e.”

Aft er all that h as been said of Porta’s life an d workswe will not indulge i n an y further reflect ions ; b utdeeming i t well to recapit ulate a li ttle , an d to sum upt h e chief charact eristics of this art ist, we will say thath e was most chaste in design ; crude , it i s true , in h i searliest productions, elegant in h i s second , an d som ewhatexaggerat ed in h i s last. In t h e science of Ch i aroscuro h ewas most learned , not, however , t o t h e exclusion of a

charge of ost en tat ion , particularly in some pai n ti n gs In

h is third mann er . In h i s draperies, I think , that h esurpassed all h i s com pet itors of t h e Florentine school ,an d especially in those paintings . in which h e followedt h e man n er an d style of Da Vin ci an d Raffaello . Buth is chiefest excellence was in colourin g , i n which h em ay b e sai d t o have rivalled t h e best amongst t h eVen et ians. From all t h i s I conclude that no on e willden y him t h e merit of having given t o t h e Florentineschool that most prin cipal element in wh i ch it was so

signally defective . For , although i t excelled many of t h e


After Fr a Bar t olom m eo’

s death , h i s designs an d

car toons rem ained in t h e han ds of Fr a Paolino da Pis toja,as Vasari te lls us . As lon g as h e lived h e made moreuse of them than , perhaps , h e ought , i n all h i s pain tin gs ;an d

,before dying , h e handed them over to t h e Dom inican

n un , Sist er Plautilla Nelli . From t h e hands of thi spaintr ess they passed in t o t h e possession of NiccoloGab ur r i , an d they were at last purchased by a Mr . Kant,an d removed to En glan d . Floren ce re tain s t h e follow ingcartoon s in t h e hall where . t h e Academ y of Design holdsi t s an n ual exhibitions.

Marked 6 an d 8 ar e t wo exqui site figures of S . M .

Magdale n e an d S . Oat h ,of Sien a, which served for t h e

picture of S . Rom an o , i n Lucca . No . 7 i s a cartoon ,

with a S . Dom in ic life size , wh i ch belon gs t o an un kn ownpicture— ’

t is som ewhat in jured . 1 1 i s t h e Blessed Cosstan zo da Fabrian o . 1 2 , t h e Ve n . Loren zo da Ripafr atta,who was n ovitiate Master to S . Anton i n o an d t h e blessedAn gelico . 20, Cardi n al Giovanni Dom in ici . 2 1 , t h e

Blessed An ton io Neyr ot Martyr. These four portraitsar e half figures , an d they must have served for t h e likenesses of t h e sam e , which were pain ted i n S . An ton in o’scell (in S . Marco) , an d which Dom . Maccarini (in h islife of t h e holy Archbishop) says h e saw t here . Theseof t h e

’ Angelico an d Pietro Capucci (t h e Blessed) ar ewan tin g.

‘ Marked 2 2 i s a cartoon , with S . Math . t h e

Apostle . 2 3 i s that of a fem ale Sai n t (un kn own) . 2 6

an d 2 7 ar e two m ost beautiful cartoon s of t h e Apostles,

Peter an d Paul , colour ed in Rom e for Fr a Marian o Fetti .

3 7,a Holy Fam ily . 44 , an An gel with a can delabrum ,

which i s att ribut ed to t h e sam e pain ter. They make1 3 in all ; an d ar e admirably preserved.

Vita di San t An ton in o, li b . vi . 0. 2 .


Still greater i s t h e n umber of design s by our Friar ,now in Floren ce . In t h e gran d collection of originaldesigns , by t h e m ost celebrated painte rs of Italy , whichamoun t s to an d which ar e kept i n t h e gallery oft h e Uffii zj , there ar e 72 by Fr a Bartol . , an d as on e

half of these h as t h e design s on both sides, they m ake ,altoge ther

,over on e hundred . Som e of these ar e

executed with a pen , an d others with a lead pencil.Th e most beautiful ar e these don e with t h e pen , an d theyar e i n height fi om six to seven in ches. We will con t e n tourselves w ith men tion in g a few of them .

There i s t h e figure of a wom an (a back view) , whichi s said to have been used i n t h e Abduction of Din athen comes an other, a very beau tiful on e , of a womankneelin g an d prayin g ,

’

t i s a part of t h e picture of t h eVirgi n del Patrocin io , at Lucca.

— An other part of t h esame picture , 5. e.

,t h e Virgin , an d a beautiful group of

m others, with the ir children — Various studies of n udein fan t s. Studies for t h e two gran d pictures of t h e Virgindel Baldac ch i n o , on e of which i s i n San Marco , an d t h eo ther i n t h e Pitti ; from whi ch we learn that Fr a Bartol .first pai n ted h i s figur es i n t h e n ude , an d then drapedthem —Designs of Holy Fam ilies— a S . Jer om , very liket hat which t h e Angelico colour ed i n t h e chapter-room ofSan Marco—A design of t h e Assum ption — an other of

a glorified Virgin , with a troop of An gels dan cin garound h er -a little design of Christ arise n — Christ i nt h e garden , an d t h e sleepin g di sciples, together withmany others n ow i n t h e possession of private in dividualsi n Florence . A short tim e ago , an En glishm an bought ,at Rom e , 20 origin al design s, by Fr a Bartol . , for 400dollars ; an d , I be lieve , that amon gst these , were som e

studi es of t h e in ferior part of t h e Last Judgm ent, comm en ced by Porta, i n S . Maria Novella

, an d fin ished by


M . Alb er t i n elli . Milan possesses some , partly in t h e

Amb 'rosian library, alon g with others , by Lionardo , an dpartly in t h e mansion of Signor Gi useppe Vallar di .

Whosoever would desire t o know t h e merit s of Fr aBar t olom m eo

’

s design s, le t h i m see these that I haven um bered , an d h e will sur ely discover that grace an dspirit , whi ch we occasionally fi n d wan ting i n som e of h i spain tin gs ; an d , in deed , t h e cont em plation of them willclearly establish t h e affin ity between h i m an d Raffaello .

Havin g Spoken of h i s designs an d cartoon s , le t us n owmention those who were h i s im itators an d di sciples . Of

t h e latter, Vasari m ention s four , an d they ar e —Cecchinodel Frate , Ben ede tto C ian fan i n i , Gabriele Rust i cci , an d

Fr a Paolino da Pi st oja ; but t h e imitators of t h e Friarfar out shin e h i s disciples. Foremost amon gst those i s M .

Alb er t i n elli, who , accordin g to Lan zi , so resem bled Fr a

Bartol ., that they seem to have been two rivers risingfrom on e common source— on e of them , in deed , a

fordable r iver, an d t h e other spreadin g itse lf out int o

vastn ess .1 Some of t h e paintin gs by Mariotto , as, for

exam ple,that executed for Fetti , in San Silvestro , ar e

charact erised by harshness . In others , where h e im itatedFr a Bartol . in boldn ess of colourin g , an d heavin ess ofshading, h e fell int o t h e great est exaggeration s ; an d of

this class i s an Annunciation of t h e Virgin , in t h e

Florent ine Academy, m arked No . 5 1 : awork wh i ch costt h e artist so much labour , that b e commen ced it twice .

But whosoever h as seen t h e stupendous paintin g, now i nt h e gallery of t h e Uffi zj , I mean t h e Visitation of S .

Eli zabeth , an d t h e very beautiful Crucifixion , will notdeny Alb er t i n elli a place am on gst t h e most di stinguishedI t alian painte rs . Had h i s industry been equal to h i s

1 H ist. of Pain tin g, Flor. School, Epoch, 2 n d.

1 3 4 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS , ETC .

particularly t h e upper part, in which there i s afixi on , with t h e B . V. M.

, S . John , S . Antonin o ,Catherin e of Sien a, all very beautiful figures : to these wem ight add Bugiardi n i , who sometimes took Fr a Bartol .for h i s model , an d successfully imitated Lionar do an d

Angelo , though not so happily as di d Soglian i .suffi ce as to t h e imitators an d disciples of Fr aBar tolommeo .

SUMMARY OFTHE PAINTINGS

BY

FRA BARTOLOMMEO DELLA PORTA,

TAKEN FROM AN ANC IENT MS.,IN THE ARCH IVES OF

SAN MARCO, FLORENCE,

ENTITLED

REG I STRY , (B.)

Com m en ci ng 1 493 , an d term i n at in g i n 1 5 1 6 .

(fol . I herein aft er record all t h ePaintings that have been execut ed by Fr a Bartol . diPagolo , of Floren ce , an d a Friar of San Marco— i . e.

, all

t h e works h e executed , whether on wood, canvas , orwalls

,together with h i s lar ge an d sm all pictures ; an d on

on e side I will place t h e works by whi ch h e h as earnedm oney ; an d on t h e other, such as were n ot sold , an dwhich were either executed for our churches, or presentedas gifts , to in di viduals. An d I do th i s i n perpetuam r ez

m em or iam , that t h e friars of t h e present an d future tim es

m ay kn ow h i s works, an d learn that h e was not in dolent,an d how (with t h e Lord

’

s ai d) , h e m ade him self useful ,an d what hon our h e reflected on h i s conven t an d

brotherhood . Dom in us qui i n cepi t , ipse per fici e t .

’

An d all t h e u n derm ention ed Pain tin gs ar e catalogued i n

1 3 6 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERS,

a book in possession Of said Fr a Bart ol . , t h e Pain t er .‘

And I , Fr a Bartol. , Cavalcanti , Syndic of said convent,an d Friar, have , with my own hand , ent ered all t h e

following Paintings

PAINTINGS WHICH WERE SOLD.

Im prim is— Said Fra Bartol. di Pagolo pai n ted two pictures ofabout two braccia each , i n on e of wh ich is t h e h ead of Yb as,

(Jesus), i n t h e oth er, t h e Virgin , for Hieron im o da Cas i,of

Bologn a, for wh ich h e received fifteen ducats.He likewise pai n ted a pictur e of about on e braccio, i n wh ichth ere i s S. M. Magdalen e, wi th Yb as (Jesus) i n t h e garden . Itwas sold t o Dom . Peri n i for forty-four gold ducats.He also pai n ted a sm all picture

, (about h alf a braccio,) i nwh ich th ere is a Nativi ty. It was sold t o Dom . Peri n i , to b esen t i n to Fran ce. He got for i t th irty ducats, as appears fromh is (Fr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s) book.

Item — A picture for Bern ardo del Bian co, of about fourb raccia. Th is was placed i n t h e Abbey, an d h e got for i t on eh un dred ducats.Item—A pictur e, for t h e Guild de

’ Con tem plan ti, for wh ichth ey defrayed all t h e expen ses, an d gave h im fifty ducats.

Item -A picture of about four an d-a-h alf braccia h igh , i nwh ich th ere is t h e Virgi n , an d S. Cath eri n e of Sien a

,w ith

m an y oth er Sai n ts . Th e Sign ory gave i t t o a Fren ch Am bassador, n am ed Mon sign or di Otton , bish op of

(n am e wan ti n g) ; an d i t was i n t h e m on th of April,1 5 1 2 , th at

t h e S ign ory gave for said picture, th ree h un dred gold ducats,alth ough it was worth m ore

, as appears by t h e credi t an d debitbook of said con ven t.2

Th is book h as escaped all m y researches.Vasari speaks of this picture i n t h e followin g ter m s In t h e Abbey

of t h e Black Fr iar s, at Ar ezzo, Fra Bartol.pain ted t h e head of Chr ist for t h eCon tem plan ti . It was a lon g t im e in t h e possession of O t tavian de Medici,an d h as n ow been placed i n t h e chapel of that house, by h is son , Alassandr o.

”At presen t, we kn ow n ot where it is.


PAINTINGS BY WHICH HE EARNED NO MONEY.

Im prim is—Said Fr a Bar t ol. pai n ted a p icture of ab out on ebraccio, i n wh ich i s Jesus with t h e Sam aritan ; th i s passed i n tot h e possession of Hi eron ym o da Cas i , of Bologn a, wh o sold i t t ot h e Duke of Man tua for s ixty ducats .

Item — Two sm all pictures for a book, i n wh ich th ere was

a

Nativity on on e side, an d a Crucifixion wi th t h e Virgi n an d S .

Joh n . It was given t o Zan obi Gaddi , by t h e Pr ior,Fath er

San ti ; valued at sixteen ducats.

Item —A p ictur e presen ted t o Baldo In gh ilan i ; valued at fi f

teen ducats.Item — Two pictures, of about a braccio each , i n on e of wh ich

was a h ead of Jesus, an d in t h e oth er a Virgi n , of t h e value of

fourteen ducats ; th ey were given t o Pier Soder i n i , wh en h e wasGon falon ier, at t h e tim e h e m ade us a presen t of t h e bell ; valuedat fourteen ducats.‘

Item — A picture of about on e braccio, i n wh ich th ere was aNativ i ty w ith an gels an d lan dscape ; valued at fifty ducats. Itwas given t o Giovan n i de Medici , n ow Pope. (Leo X.)Item — A picture on can vas, of about two braccia, i n wh ich h e

pain ted a Virgi n , with t h e In fan t an d S . Joseph ; valued at eigh tducats. It was given t o t h e Nun s of San ta Lucia.

Item —Two little pictures, i n on e of wh ich was a h ead of

Jesus, an d i n t h e oth er a Virgi n ; valued at five ducats. It wasgiven t o t h e con ven t of Prato.

Item —Two sm all pictures for a book , i n wh ich th ere i s a

Crucifixion , wi th t h e Virgi n an d S. Joh n ; t h e secon d h as a

Nativ ity; valued at sixtee n ducats. Fr a Bartol. da Faen za gavei t t o h is b roth er.

Chapter ii i. , of thi s volum e. Th e people called t h e hell of San MarcoLa Piagn on a, because i t was run g when t h e Arab b iat i besi eged that edifice.It was taken from t h e t h e cam pan ile by Tan ai Nerbi, Jun e 3 0t h , 1 498 , an dwas then ce carr ied off t o t h e church of S. Fran cis. In 1 509 t h e Pope causedt h e Fran ciscan s t o restore it to t h e Dom in i can s.


Item—He pain ted a picture of about four an d-a-h alf bracciai n h eigh t, for Piero Cam bi ; valued at on e h un dred an d th irtyducats. It is n ow i n San Marco

,over t h e altar of S. Peter

Martyr.‘

Item — Two pictures of about four braccia h igh , i n on e of wh ich

i s a S . Peter ; an d i n t h e oth er S . Paul ; valued at about th irtyducats. But as t h e S. Peter is im perf ect, I set i t down at

twen ty-five. Th ey were b oth given t o t h e ch urch of San

Silvestro.

Item —A S. George, design ed i n oi l, i n t h e h ouse of Pugli ese ;as i t i s n ot fin i sh ed

,I do n ot determ in e i t s value.

Item — A picture six an d-a—h alf braccia h igh , represen ti n g S.

Cath eri n e of S ien a, S . Mary Magdalen e, God t h e Fath er, an dfour An gels. It was destin ed for t h e con ven t of Muran o

,b ut i t is

n ow i n our con ven t, at Lucca ; i t i s worth about n i n ety gold ducats.Item —A picture of about six braccia h igh , with

figures. It i s n ow i n t h e ch urch of S. Marco, over t h e altar ofS. Cath erin e of Sien a. It i s worth m ore th an four h un dred

gold ducats.Item —A S. Vi n cen t, wh ich is over t h e door leadi n g t o t h e

Sacristy ; i t i s worth sixteen ducats.Item—A picture of about t wo b ra ccia an d th ree quarters, i n

wh ich th ere is a Virgi n w ith t h e In fan t. Th e Prior gave i t t oBern ardo de’ Medici ; i t is valued at sixteen ducats.Item —A picture of th ree an d a quarter braccia, beautifully

orn am en ted. Th is was given t o Loren zo dei Medici , togeth erwi th t h e Madon n a an d An gels ; value on e h un dred ducats.Item — A picture of s ix b raccia i n h eigh t ; i t i s a S . Mark,

executed for our con ven t ( San Marco) ; i t i s valued at fortyducats .

Item — A C rucifixion , of about two an d-a-h alf braccia, wh ichFr a Filippo Strozzi gave t o Fran cesco del Pugliese ; valued a t

fifteen ducats.

1 Th e Cam bi fam i ly h ad their bur ial-place i n t h e church of San Marco .Th e con ven t of t h e Nun s of S ta Lucia, n o lon ger exists. Men tion i s m adeof it in on e of t h e precedi n g en tr ies.


I t em—A picture of four an d-a-h alf b raccia h igh , in wh ich isS. Sebastian , with an An gel. It is n ow i n our ch urch of San

Marco ; valued at twen ty ducats.Item—A very sm all picture, i n wh ich i s a S . Jerom . Th is

was pai n ted at t h e request of Fr a Hieron ym o Rossi , th en Pri orof San Marco ; valued at seven ducats.Item—A picture of about two an d-a-h alf b raccia, i n wh ichth ere is a Madon n a with t h e In fan t. Th is was given t o

Alfon si n a de’ Medi ci ; valued at twen ty-five ducat s.I

This qua in t catalogue in for m s us of m an y works by Era Bartol. n otm en t ion ed by Vasar i. Never th eless, m an y pa in tin gs of a later period haven Ot been in ser ted by t h e Syn dic. Here, for exam ple, ther e i s n o m en tion oft h e Depos ition from t h e Cross, whi ch Fr a Bartol. repeated frequen tly. Th e

Syn dic h as also om itted t h e Assum ption , pain ted for Prato an d t h e picturei n t h e n ovitiate of S. Marco.


an d literature . It was on this accoun t that Caesar Scali gerdid n ot hesitate to pron ounce h im An old a n d n ew

li b r a ry of a ll t h a t was good i n sci en ce,”

an d that h ee lsewhere speaks Of him as a Ph oen ix of i n tellects .

”

Vasari term s him a m ost rare m an , an d un iversallylearned i n all t h e said faculties ; an d h e adds , that h eun dertook to write h i s life , n ot on ly for t h e ben efit Ofartists

,but of t h e whole world . No m atter how m uch

an y on e m ay di srespect t h e Con ven tual Orders , I holdthat t h e n am e of Fr a Giocon do must com m an d ve n eration .

Hi s age , it i s true— for it was an age of celebrities— m aypoin t to h i s equal , but it can n ot exhibit an y on e who wassuperior to him : in deed , we thin k ourselves un equal tothis subject, an d our previous studies will not perm it usto treat it worthily . We will , therefore , con fine ourselvesto a n arrative of h is life an d works ; an d if we shall haveaided i n dissipatin g t h e clouds that overhan g t h e hist oryof this distin gui shed artist, we will con sole ourse lves witht h e thought of havin g ren dered n o triflin g service t o

le tt ers an d arts .

But before we begin to wri te of Fr a Giovan n iGiocon do , we must n eeds touch a question whichoriginated with Ti r ab osch i , an d h as been a subj ect ofcon troversy durin g t h e past cen tury

, amon gst t h e

learn ed , who , for want of t h e opportune notices, haven o t been able t o arrive at an y satisfactory solution Of

t h e di fficulty . Th e question i s , whether Fr a Giocondow as a Dom in ican or Fran ciscan Friar

,or m erely a

secular priest . This question , which under other circum st an ces , m ight appear to b e of n o momen t, i s, n evert h eless , of great im portan ce here , as we ar e n ot anxiousto b e charged with reapin g other people

’

s harvest. Eventhough we b e n ot able to rem ove all doubts , we fan cywe shall have don e some service by settin g forth t h e


claim s which , i n our opin ion ,t h e Order of S . Dom in ic

h as on this illustrious religious .

Before Tir ab osch i m ooted t h e subject, everybodybelieved that Fr a Giocon do was a m em ber of t h e OrderOf Preach in g-Friars. Nor was there an y im portan ceattached to t h e mere assertion of Budeo , how grave soeverh i s authority m ay b e , who styles h im a sim ple priest : as

it was com m on ly thought that i n order to atten d to t h econ struction of t h e m an y edifice s at which h e w as

e n gaged , h e m ight have left off t h e habit of h i s Orderfor a while— as did m an y other m em bers Of t h e religioushouses i n the se tim es

,when their rigorous disciplin e h ad

been relaxed .

1 Two writer s , if n ot con tem poraries,

certain ly n ear t h e period of Giocon do , term h im a Domin i can — an d these ar e Vasari an d Pan vi n io : t h e form er

,

i n h i s Lives of t h e Pain ters,Sculptors , an d Architects ,

where h e affirm s that h e h ad am ple n otices of thisdistin guished art ist , as h e easily m ight, from Don at t o

Gian n otti,whom h e quotes , an d w h o h ad been Gio

con do’s in tim ate i n Fran ce, an d Vasari’

s i n Italy ; t h esecon d , a m ost learn ed writer , records h i m am on gst t h eillustriou s m en Of Veron a , an d says , withou t doubt , thath e was a. Dom in ican .

2 Fathers Razzi an d Rovettafollowed Vasari ; an d Scipion e Mat fe i

,i n h i s “ Veron a

Illustrated ,” repeats all that Fathers Echard an d Qu i e t i f 3

l Fr a Giovan n i Mon t or soli,of t h e S ervites ; Don Giuli o Clovio, t h e Can on

of t h e Lateran ; Fra Marco Pen sab en e, t h e Dom in ican ; h i s con fr ere, Fr aGuglielm o di Marcillat

,an d other rel igious ar tists

,cast off their habits at

that per iod.3 On uph r u Pan vi n u Ver on en s, An tiq. Ver . lib. vr r . Fr . J. Joeun dus , ofVeron a, of t h e Order of Preachi n g Friars, a m ost eloquen t an d learn ed m a n ,

an d t h e in tim ate of Loren zo t h e Magn ificen t, h as left us m an y m on um en tsOf h i s gen ius .

”

3 Mafi ei,Veron a Illustr ata . Echard an d Quiet i f, Bi b liotheca, Scr ipt. 0r d

Pr eed. v. i i.

1 44 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERS,

h ad writt en on t h e life an d works of Giocondo . Moreover, when Scaliger called Giocondo a Franciscan ,Echard , Mon n oye , an d Mafi

'

ei.

replied to h i m by statin gthat as Scaglier was farther removed from t h e age ofGiocondo than were Vasari an d Pan vi n io , an d that as h ewas a very inaccurate writer , they could not prefer himt o t h e two former . It i s true that Julius Caesar Scaliger

,

father of Joseph , was a di sciple ofFr a Giocon do ; but h edoes n ot say whether h e was a Fran ciscan or Dom in ican :h e does n othin g more than laud h im for h i s gen ius ,callin g h i m a m os t accom plish ed Scot is t ;

1 be in g an xious ,perhaps, to extol h i s powers of di sputation , an d likeninghim to Duns Scotus, t h e Mi n orite , whose subtlety i s so

un iversally known . To these grave authorities Tiraboschi first , an d after him Father G . Della Valle , of t h eMin orites , opposed in favour of t h e Franciscan s t h e

grave assertion of Luca Paccioli , of t h e sam e Order , an da celebrated m athem atician , who , lectur in g in Ven ice ont h e Fifth Book of Eucli d , an d m en tion in g all t h e mostdistin guished Fran ciscan s who frequen ted h i s schooln um bers amongst them , Fr a Giovan ni Giocon do , Of

Veron a. Th i s authority, unknown to Fathers Echardan d Qui e t if , an d even to Maffei , i s of great im portance ,as Paeci oli states what came un der h i s own notice :whereas , Vasari an d Pan vi n io did n ot know Giocondopersonally .

2 When t h e argumen t h ad gone t his length,

Father G . Della Valle looked on t h e controversy as

e n ded , an d plumed himself thereon . But Ti r ab oseh idiscovered another authority in favour of t h e Dominican s ,3

Apud Echard loc . ci t .See Vasar i ’s Life of Fr a Giocon do, an d par ti cularly t h e edi tion published

i n S ien a, 1 792 , t h e VII. vol. of which con tain s a discourse delivered by F.

Della Valle,i n Turin

,1 792 .

3 Ti rab oseh i : Tom e 6 , c. i ii ., l ib. 3 . Tem an za states, that this authority


fore-fi n ger Of which poin ts t o t h e in scription , covers t h espace that should b e occupied by t h e le tt ers which oughtto follow t h e E . In a w ord

, we should read C . Pli n i i

Ver on en si s Th e Dom in ican habit an d i n scr iption attest that i t i s h e.

‘ In fact, to what other m em berof t h e order Of S . Dom in ic could t h e city of Veron a haveerec t ed such a splen did m on um en t , or what other couldit have represen ted with Plin y’s Epistles, sin ce Fr aGi OCOn dO

’

s was m ost certain ly t h e first an d m ost com ple t eedition of them ? Surely , n o on e will im agin e that t h eFren ch parliam en t , or Veron a could have been ign orantof t h e In stitute to which this di stin guished arch i tect an dan tiquarian be lon ged .

Such reason in gs as these ren dered t h e solution of t h edoubt n ot on ly di ffi cult but hopeless : wherefore , as peacem akers betwee n com batan ts, an d hopin g rather to se t aside ,than to solve t h e question , t h e Marquis Polen i an d Te

m an za in terposed the ir kin dly offices , statin g that Fr aGiocon do was a Dom inican Friar

, w h o arbitrarily re t urn edto t h e world , an d was un iversally called a pr iest, as

Budeo writes ; an d that h e fin ally sought retirem en t int h e cloisters of t h e Franciscan s . This would lead us tocon clude that h e h ad been , at differen t periods , a Dom in ican ,

a secular pri est, an d a Fran ciscan . This solution ,

though i t h as some difficulties , appears to us to b e reasonable , an d we therefore receive it as t h e truest ;2 so much

Vi te Dei pi u celebri , Architetti, &e. There was a portrait of Giocon do i nt h e Coun cil Hall of Ven ice, pa in ted by Tiz ian o, b ut i t was destr oyed by fi r ei n 1 5 77.

—V. Ti paldo Elogio di Fr a Giocon do.3 If Veron a caused Fr a Giocon do

’

s liken ess to b e sculptur ed, we m ustpresum e that it was don e after h is death, as i t was n ot usual t o con fer suchhon ours on t h e livi n g ; an d , as we fi n d h im clothed in t h e Dom i n i can habit,i t is b ut reason able to suppose that h e was buried i n i t . Th is con fusest h e question still m ore.


t h e more as I t cor n cides with what Scali ger says, i na letter dated 1 594 , i n which h e tells us that h i s fatherwas a pupil Of Giocon do , an d that t h e latter taught h imgram m ar an d poli te literature ; addin g, that h e su b sequen t

lg b ecam e a Fr a n ci sca n . From all this I would conclude ,that it was on ly i n h i s m ature years h e took t h e Min oritehabit , leaving us to suppose that h e h ad en rolled him selfamon gst t h e Dom i n i can s when very youn g . This transi t ion from on e Order to an other was n o un com m on factat that period , an d hi story records m an y exam ples Of it .Havin g thus solved these difficulties, we n ow resum e

t h e n arrative of t h e life an d works of our an tiquarianarch i tect. Bu t we m ust first express our sorrow , thatthis illustrious Italian h as foun d n o biographer am on gsth i s own coun trymen ; so m uch so that if it were n ot fort h e precious fragm en ts of h i s life tran sm i tted to us byVasar i , t h e Tuscan , we should kn ow n othin g m ore of Giocondo than h i s works, as Pan vi n i o , t h e Veron ese , m erelym akes passin g m en tion of it ; an d Maffei , as h as beensaid already, h as i n great part copied Echard an d

Qui e t i f . We ar e, therefore , obliged to acknowledge our

ignorance of t h e year i n which h e was born ,of a great

portion of h i s life— n ay, an d Of t h e year of h i s death , an dplace of h i s sepulchre .

Tem an za an d Milizia stat e that h e was born A . D .

1 43 5 ;1 Masselli i n 1 453 ;

2 but a very an cien t documen tthat we will produce , would have us believe that h e saw

t h e light about 1 43 0 ; for it distin ctly states that i n 1 5 1 4h e h ad overpassed h i s e ightieth year . Nobody h as

ever den ied that Veron a was h i s birth-place ; but eventhough J . Caesar Scaliger affirms that h e cam e of n oble

Tem an za, Milizia, Degli archi t etti an tichi, &c.

,vol. 1 . 3 .

3 Masselli’

s Notes to Vasar i .


lineage , w e have every reason to suspect t h e truth of thisw riter’s assertion . Father Orlan di , i n h i s Pict orialAlphabet,

” represen ts Fr a Giocon do t o have been t h e

brother of Fran cesco Mon signori , t h e Veron ese painter ,eviden tly con foun din g Fr a. Gerolam o Monsignori

,t h e

Dom inican pain ter , whose life we have given ,wi th Fr a

Giovann i Giocon do .

1 Federici says that h e was a m em

b er Of t h e Ogn i b en ez fam ily ; but I en tirely agree with

Em ilio Tipaldo , who states that G iocon do was h i s cognom en .

3

Some historians , i n t h e absen ce of authentic docum en ts , take special delight i n form in g con j ectures , an dthere ar e som e so h old in th i s in stan ce , that they n everfail to collect an abun dan t harvest . We will not followthem i n such vagaries, but will rather con fine ourse lvesto t h e few , ye t precious, mem orials that have survived ourGiocon do . Hi s singular acquir emen ts in letters, humanan d divine , h i s philological powers , together with h isCOpious an d recondite erudition , plain ly m an i fest that h epossessed a most vigorous in tellect , that h e applied h i mself intensely to h i s studies, an d that h e was in doctrinat edby t h e ablest m asters .

At that period t h e Dom in ican Order coun ted manymost di stin guished m embers , who were thoroughly ve rsedi n all t h e scien ces, an d particularly in t h e study Of antiqui t ies, an d of t h e primitive lan guages. Not t o speak of

Tem en za loc. cit., p. 3 5. This assertion is foun ded on an edition ofVitruvius, that h e m en tion s i n a catalogue of books on Italian architectur ei t s title run s thus X. Books of Vitruvius’s Ar chitectur e. Witht h e or n am en tation s of Fra Giocon do Mon sign ori , t h e Dom in ican . Thi sedi t ion was un kn own to Polen i .

3 Thi s i s a m ere gratuitous assertion , m ade by Feder ici to Tem an za, wh o

says th at h e foun d m en ti on of a certa in Frater Joan n es de Om n i b on o de

Veron a, ad m m , 1 449 . This, Surely, can n ot have been Fr a Giocon do.3 Elogio

,p. 1 0.


an d h e paid t h e more particular atten tion to thi s branch ,as h i s coun try was then laid desolate by t h e swords an d

torches of foreign an d native marauders . We ar e toldby Vasari that h e travelled over all Italy, an d that h etarried a lon g tim e at Rom e . Le t us hear this author :“ Applyin g him self to t h e study Of an tiquities, an d min u t ely exam in in g t h e an cien t buildin gs , an d t h e i n scr iption s on t h e sepulchres an d other ven erable m on um en tsi n Rom e an d i t s suburbs

,n ay, an d everywhere throughout

Italy , h e collected i n a very beautiful volum e t h e sai din scription s , an d sen t it, accordin g to t h e Veron ese themse lves, to Lorenzo t h e Magn ificen t . This i s t h e firstan d most authe n ticated m em oir that we have of Fr aGiocon do . Accordi n g to Pan vi n io ,

1t h e Latin i n scr ip

tion s exceeded two thousan d. Th i s collection , which h asmerited t h e eulogiesOf Gruter an dSigon i o ,was pron oun cedbyMaffe i to b e t h e m ost precious an d perfect work of t h eV eron ese an t iquarian .

2 In t h e dedication to Loren zo de’

Medici h e sign s himself Frater Jocun dus Ver on en si s,”

whi ch proves that h e was then a fr iar . Now as Loren zode

’ Medici died in 1 492 , we m ay remark with Polen ithat said dedi cation must have been writte n som e tim e

before this date ; an d Ti r ab oseh i Observes that it wascom posed at Rome , an d was then ce transm itted toFloren ce .

3

About 1 492 , if Giuseppe Scaliger states t h e truth , Fr aGiocon do was i n t h e Castle of Lodr on e , in t h e Tren tin eAlps , as appear s by a letter of t h e said Scaliger, i nwhich , narratin g t h e life of h i s father , h e says , that whena m ere boy h e was taught grammar by Giocon do , whoh ad taken refuge i n their cast le , which was situated

An ales. Veron en s, loc. cit. 2 Ver on a Illustr ata, 1. i i i.3 Stori a della Lett. Ital. loc. cit.

SCULPTORS,AND ARCHITECT S . 1 5 1

between Tren to an d Br esci a.

l We can easily determ in et h e year thus z—Julius Scaliger w as born i n 1 484 , an dwe can n ot fan cy that h e could have appli ed him self tot h e study of gram m ar , un der such an able preceptor ,before h e was eight years of age . We can n ot, therefore ,agree with Echar d who says that Scaliger was in itiatedi n t h e Greek lan guage by Giocon do , about 1 490, as t h epupil was then on ly six years old , an age at which h ecould have don e little m ore than lisp h i s m atern al idiom ,

n o t t o m en tion Greek , wh i ch h e could n ot have m asteredthen . I do n ot kn ow to what Tem an za alludes , when h esays that Fr a Giocon do was i n com m un ication w ith LouisDuke of Orle an s i n ' 1 495 , durin g h i s soj ourn at Asti ,where h e con tem plated t h e con quest of t h e Duchy ofMilan . He does n ot quote an y authori ty for this assertion

,an d we , the refore , will n ot vouch for t h e fact . But

though Gioco n do m ay n ot have gon e to Asti at thatpe riod , it seem s cer tain ,

n everthe less , that i n t h e followi n g year h e se t out from Italy for t h e Fren ch capital .2

This truly learn ed m an added to t h e vast stores of h i sacquirem en ts i n every region that h e visited , to t h e in estim able advan tage of t h e republic of le tters ; an d whilsti n Paris h e searched t h e an cie n t librari es an d discovereda com plete collection of t h e Le tters of t h e Secon d Plin y,on ly a few of whi ch

,owin g to t h e ign oran ce of t h e

am an uen se s , h ad been hitherto given to t h e public .Havin g co llated them w ith t h e bes t codices , an d dili

Scaliger,Epist. Kal ,

Jun e xiv.,MDXCIV.

“ Th e child Juli us, rearedo n t h e pater n al t er r i t or v , together w ith h i s brother, Titus, learn ed t h e firstrudim en ts of letters an d gram m ar fr om Giocon do, wh o was a clien t of t h efam ily. He was a m ost learn ed an d exem plar y m an . He subsequen tlyj oin ed t h e Fran ciscan s .

” Ap. Echard. loc. ci t . p. 3 7 .

2 Loc. ci t . p. 5 7 . Tem an za thi n ks that h e set out for Fran ce evenbefore 1 490.


gent ly corrected them , h e published an d dedi cat edthem to t h e said Duke of Orlean s, who h ad recentlyascended t h e th ron e with t h e title of Louis XII . Criticsar e wont to raise a question concern ing t h e place an d

time of this publication . Tipaldo quot es an edi tionpublished i n Bologn a in but Echard does n ot

notice t h e Bologn ese edi tion , an d records only that whichsaw t h e light i n Ven ice , A . D . This edi tion i skn own as t h e Aldin e . It i s certain , however, that Fr aGiocon do h ad nothing to do with t h e edition of 1 498 ;an d thi s i s clearly proved by Ti r ab oseh i , who , quot in g aletter from Aldo‘ Man uzio , prefixed to t h e Ven etianedition , affi rms that h e was merely t h e publisher of t h eletters di scovered by Fr a Giocon do , from whom h e h ad

rece ived t h e addi tions,variations

, an d correction s ?

Whilst Giocondo was di ligen tly in vestigatin g t h e rem ainsof Roman grandeur , an d illustr atin g t h e most distin gui shed writers of Latium , (for in deed in an in credibly shortperiod h e h ad an notated an d published man y of them )h e never forgot h i s beloved st udy of architectur e ; foreven as early as 1 500 we find him in t h e French capit al ,styled with t h e title of Royal Architect. It was at thisperiod that h e began to lecture on Vitruvius, but whetheri n publi c or private I have n ot been able to ascertain .

For t h e elucidation of that very obscure text , h e availedhimself an d h i s scholars of a great number of arch i tecturaldesign swhich related to t h e subjects of which h e treat ed ;an d this we have on t h e authority of Budeo, who wash i s disciple , an d recorded t h e fact in h i s work on t h ePan dects .

‘ At this time t h e ancient bridge of Paris was

E logio di Fr a Giocon do.Bibliotheca Scr ipt. 0r d. Pr sedica t . vol 2 , p. 3 6.

3 Stor ia della Lett . Ital. l oc . ci t . ix.

An n otat . i n Pan dectas apud Echard. I t was our good fortun e to have


perfectly circular form ,i n order that t h e ascen t should b e

m ore facile . That t h e Recon structor” was also t h e

architect , i s proved by t h e stipend of 43 fran cs, whichh e received dai ly , for it was m ore , perhaps , than each of

t h e eight boatm en rece ived per mon th ; it i s also provedby this, that there was n o architect em ployed who was

superior t o h im ; an d if further proof b e n eeded , w e m ayfi n d it i n Budeo , h i s di sciple , who styles him RoyalArchitect ; an d , also , i n San n azar o

’

s epi gr am .

l On t h e

l0t h of July,1 507 , t h e first ston e of t h e last arch was

laid , an d t h e‘ whole work was com ple t ed i n Septem be r,1 5 1 2 . It cost m ore than on e m illion six hun dred an dsixty thousan d lire . Accordi n g toTem an za , th i s bridge h adfive arches ! each with a span of 54 feet ; an d the ir height

,

above t h e level of t h e water , was at least 40 feet. Th e

four isolated piers were 1 55 feet i n t h e solid . Their len gth ,which determ in es t h e width of t h e bridge , i s 82 feet , n otcom pr isin g t h e trian gular spurs, which were 1 2 feet highon both fron ts ; t h e vaul ts of t h e arches , which werepoin ted, were m ore than 4 feet thick .

3 Th e whole work

li paldo E logio, p. 1 5 . San n azzaro’s distich run s thus

Jucun dus gem i n um im posuit tibi, Sequan s , pon tem ,

Hun c t u jure potes dicere Pon t ificem2 In 1 660, when this br idge was un dergoin g repair s, (regn an te Lodovico

XIV.) t h e followi n g in scr iption , which n o lon ger exists, was en graved :Jucun dus fac i lem pr te b ui t tibi, Sequan a, pon tem

In vi cto aedi les flum in e r es t i t uun tRegn an t e Lodovico XIV.

A lexan der de Sen e Urbis Pr asfect us.3 We m ust say that t h e desig n was either frequen tly al t ered, or that t h e

writers quoted have fallen i n to error, as Della Valle, citin g C laude Mal in gre,says, th at t h e sixth ar ch was fi n ished July 1 0, 1 507 . Tipaldo sta tes thatthi s br idge h ad three ar ches, Tem e n za

,fi ve, an d Mal i n gre, s ix . We m ay

observe, too, that there is som e discrepan cy betwee n Tipaldo an d Tem e n za,

t h e form er stati n g that t h e bridge was n ot to b e of circular form an d t h e

latter assertin g that t h e arches wer e poi n ted.


was of ston e , quarri ed i n t h e vicin ity . On both sides oft h e road , over t h e bridge , which was 2 6 fee t wide , was a

row of shops an d houses , of four flats . When Scam ozzo ,t h e celebrated architect, was i n Paris, i n 1 600, h e

adm itted , that h e n owhere saw an ywork superior to this.

San n azar o, J . Caesar Scaliger , an d Vasari , state that Fr aGiocon do erected two bridges over t h e Se in e . Somebelieve that t h e secon d was t h e Pon t Pet i t ; but Mari ette ,i n a le tt er dated 1 77 1 , labours to prove that Fr a Giocon doe rected on ly on e bridge . If we ar e to credit Vasari , wem ust believe tha t this archi tect con structed a n i nfin i ty ofwor ks f or t h a t ki n g t h r ough ou t h i s dom i n ion ; but, h eadds , that h e om it s m en tionin g them

,i n con sideration of

t h e two bridges, which were h i s grandest buildi n gs .

Tipaldo relates , that Giocon do design ed t h e Castle deGaillon ,

i n Norm an dy , which was bui lt i n t h e Gothicstyle , i n 1 505 ; it belon ged to t h e Cardin al D

’

Am b oi se ,

was afterwards t h e dom icile of t h e Bishops ofRouen ,an d

was fin ally destroyed i n t h e tim e of t h e ‘ revolution ;Th i s i s a clear proof that our Friar -did n o t despise t h eGoth i c archit ecture , m uch as h e desiderated t h e revivalof t h e Greek an d Latin . He kn ew how to appreciatet h e beauties an d perfection s of that style , which som e callGothic , an d others Teuton ic . It was durin g h i s soj ourni n Paris , that an in cident, which i s n arrated by Vasari ,occurred to Giocon do . Th e form er h ad it from Don atoGian otti , t h e Floren tin e , wh o was Gi ocon do

’

s m os t i n t i

m a t e fr i en d . It i s this —Havin g go t a peach -tree , h eplan ted it i n an earthen vase , an d i n a short tim e ityie lded so m uch fruit, that h e took special pleasure i nlookin g at it. Havin g placed it on a spot where t h e

kin g might see it as h e passed, som e of h i s retin ue utterly

1 56 ‘ MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

destroyed t h e plant, to t h e great chagrin of t h e goodreligious .

‘

Af t er having spent many years superin tendin g t h ebuildin g of t h e bridge , Giocondo proceeded t o Ven i ce in1 506 , havin g been in vited , as it would appear, t o takecharge of some im portan t works e n trusted t o him bythat Republic . Th e deposit of t h e Bren ta bein g carriedcontin uously in to t h e Ven etian lagoon s, threate n ed theirdestruction , an d great peril to t h e city . Vasar i writesthat Giocon do warn ed t h e authorities of t h e ruin thatmust b efal them if they did n ot take timely precaution s ;wherefore , “ Having assembled t h e most distin guisheden gin eers an d archite cts of Italy , many opin ion s wereadvan ced , an d many plans were suggested ; but as Fr aGi ocon do

’

s was pron ounced to b e t h e best, it was adopted.

They then began to turn off (by m ean s of excavation s)two-thi rds or on e-half of t h e wate rs of t h e Bren ta , whichwaters were now discharged into t h e lagoon of Chioggia.

”

Tem an za im pugns this statem en t, an d adduces variousdocumen ts to prove that t h e n ew canal h ad been comm en ced as early as 1 488, an d that it was fin ished i n1 495 . This can al , now called t h e Brenton e

,cost

ducats ; i t i s twen ty-five miles lon g. Tem an za

adds that it was improved an d lengthened by t h e

arch i tect Alessio Aleardi ; but that as there remain edmuch to b e done to t h e emissary, t h e College of

Sen ators, i n 1 506 , invit ed Giocon do to express h isopin ion on all that h ad been executed

, as well as on

fur ther improvements . Having examined t h e place ,beginni ng at t h e em issary of Lim en a, (which was thenin a b ad condition ,) h e exten ded h i s observation s on t h eri ght an d left, as far as t h e lagoon s an d t h e sea. He

then made an exact measurem ent of t h e leve l of t h e old

1 Vasar i, Life of Fr a Giocon do.

1 58 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERs ,

con tradicts him self elsewhere , was led to form t h e opinionon t h e authority of Fr a Luca Paccioli , t h e Min ori te ,who , on t h e 1 1 th day of August, AD 1 508, wh enlecturi n g on t h e Fifth Book of Euclid , (said lecturesbein g given at Ve n i ce ,) asserted that h e h ad, am on gsth i s auditors , a m an of h i s own in stitut e , n am ely , Fr aGiocon do , t h e Veron ese ; an d h e adds that all h i s

auditors w ere of t h e sam e com mun i ty .

‘ Tem an za,

e n deavourin g to accoun t for this fact , supposes that Fr aG iocon do

,havin g thrown off t h e Dom in ican habit, m ay

have been roughly u sed by h i s superiors , an d that as h ewas now a sexage n er i an ,

h e resolved to e n ter t h e

Franciscan cloist er . I will n either adm it n or rej ect thisopini on ; but I m ust observe that if h e em braced t h e

Mi n orite disciplin e in 1 508 , h e m us t n ecessarily havespen t t h e greater number of h i s days am on gst t h e

Preachin g-Friars.

Fr a Giocon do’

s soj ourn in Ve n ice was n ot con tin uousdurin g these two years , for Father Feder i ci wri tes , thath e proceeded , i n 1 507 , to Trevigi to superin ten d som e

hydraulic works on t h e Piave .

2 But h i s duties as a

good citizen soon recalled h im to Ven ice . Sad an d

sorrowful were t h e tim es. Pope Julius II . was an xiousto wreak h i s ven geance on that Republic

,which dis

t ur b ed h i s repose ; an d t h e ven gean ce of Julius was

trem en dous . Not con t en t with leaguin g all Europeagain st t h e Adriatic Queen , h e fulm in ated heaven

’

s

thun ders on h e r dom es an d m inarets ; an d heaven seem ed

He says, however, (p. 69 of t h e L ife of Fra Giocon do) that at t h e periodof t h e League of Cam bray, A.D .

, 1 509 , Fr a Giocon do was passin g h isdays wi t h h i s con frer es , t h e Dom i n i ca n s, i n t h e m on astery of San N iccolo a tTrevigi . Tem a n za i s excellen t authority

,an d we m ay regard h is words as

provin g beyon d all doubt that Fra Giocon do was a Dom in ican i n 1 500.

2 Feder ici, Mem orie Trevigi an e, vol . i i.


ban ded with ear th for t h e ruin of Ven ice . Fire con

sum ed t h e Republican arsen al ; t h e citadel of Brescia wasa heap of charred cin ders ; t h e archives were destroyed ;t h e m on ey for t h e paym en t of t h e troops was lost i n t h esea ; an d these calam ities were followed by t h e defeatat Gh i r adadda .

l Nevertheless, t h e Spirit of t h e Republicwas un tamed , an d with un preceden ted valour an d cons tan cy, it struggled again st t h e wrath of heaven an d

earth . Wishin g to protect Trevigi again st t h e em perorMaxim ilian ,

it h ad recourse to Fr a Giocon do ; an d t h e

fri ar , who was as skilful i n fortification s as h e was in decipherin g an old m an uscript, or illustratin g t h e crabbedt ext ofVitruvius

,se t out on t h e 9 t h of Jun e , from Ven ice ,

an d proceeded to Trevigi . He h ad scarcely en tered t h ewalls, when h e arran ged a n ew plan of defen ce . He

spared n either hospitals n or palaces, but cleared awayall of them i n order to con str uct t h e fosse an d esplanade .

He levelled all t h e high towers on t h e walls, that theymight n ot serve as m arks for t h e e n em y’s gun n ers , to t h ein evitable destr uction of t h e besieged . Th e historianZuccat o , though lam en tin g t h e ruin of t h e an cien t city

,

could n ot r efi '

ai n from laudin g t h e beauty of this work,

an d Bologn i extols it i n Latin verses. An d , verily , therearose fi om these rui n s, such a work , as Bem bo says, wasn o where else to b e witn essed , whether as a defen ce oran orn am en t to a city . Th e n ew style of military operation s, says Tipaldo, ow in g to

'

t h e inven tion of that lesshum an than diabolical in strum en t , required n ew ar ch i t ec

ture . Here im itation was of little use , an d t h e moreurgen t t h e n eed , t h e more n ecessary was it to secureprom ptn ess of plan an d gen ius . Le t us im agin e thisfriar, who h ad passed t h e greater part of h i s lif e collect

Guicciardi n i , Storia d’ Italia, li b . viii., chap. i ., ad. an n . 1 509.


i n g Latin in scriptions , an d consultin g Latin authors— le tus im agin e h im called t o defen d a city again st these t e rrible m issiles

,wh i ch ar e far more destructive than

heaven ’

s thunder !” Stran ge sight to behold a Fr i ardefen din g a city again st which all Europe was leagued !Th e tem porary defen ces , form ed out of clay , which h eerected at this period , were substituted by ston ework i nt h e followin g year ; an d, i n deed , such was i t s excellen ce ,that it astoun ded Charles V. when h e visited t h e city.

It was from t h e con tem plation of these defen ces , thatPen n acchio derived that great knowledge of e n gin eerin gan d m ilitary architecture which en titled h im to t h e este emof .a king of En glan d . Fr a Giocon do con struct ed n ew

battlem e n ts, excavated n ew fosses, an d built ex t r aordinary water—tan ks, by mean s of which h e was en abled toflood t h e coun try for a mile roun d , at a m om en t’s n otice .

Won derful power o f ar t , that remin ds u s of t h e prodigieswhich love of coun try prom pted Archimedes to performi n t h e lan d of t h e fabulous gian ts ! In fact , t h e watertanks were twice effectively em ployed to scatt er t h ee n em y, an d im pede h i s approach .

1 Hen ce , Fr a G iocon do was t h e first lin k , i n that series of militarye n gi n eers that subsequen tly flourished i n t h e Dom in icanOrder, which m ay truly con gratulate it self on havin g

given man y a valian t soldi er to “n ative land .

” Havin gcom pleted t h e defen ces, our Friar on ce m ore be t ook h i mself to h i s studies on an tiquities an d archi t ecture . Th e

1 Elogio, et c. p. 2 3 . These m achin es were subsequen tly con structedof m arble, with keys an d pipes of bron ze an d steel ; an d Tipaldo says thatthey were to b e seen a t t h e begin n i n g of t h e presen t cen tury. Federi ci h aspublished an accoun t of all t h e operation s about Trevigi at t h e period of t h esiege. A docum en t, dated Novem ber 1 8 , 1 509, h as t h e follow in g sub scr iption For a Partido, (a m il itary i n strum en t) m ade by com m an d

,by Alvise

Lan cen igo an d m e, Fra Giovan n i Giocon do .” Mem . Tr evig.


Fr a Giocon do , therefore , presented him self to t h e Magistracy, an d design ed such a magnifice n t plan , that Vasaritells us

“n othin g by an y artist could have been more

magnificent, more beautiful , or bett er arran ged .

” Inthis design h e consulted not on ly t h e conven ien ce an d

requi rements of a place appropriated to com m erce ; buth e , likewise , took care that it should b e an orn am en t t ot h e city, an d i n every way fitt ed for t h e recreation of t h epeople . Vasari gives us an am ple description of it, an dpon dering it, we can n ot but admire t h e noble im agin ation , an d t h e exquisite tast e of this di stin guishedarchitect. Nevertheless, we m ust lam en t t h e exigen ciesof t h e times which deprived t h e city of this stupen dousorn am en tation . Two causes preve n ted Giocon do’s designfrom bein g reali sed . Th e first was i t s own magn i ficen ce ;for t h e Republic , exhausted by t h e protracted war inwhich it was en gaged against t h e League of Cambray ,could n ot supply t h e necessary sum s. Th e secon d wast h e com petition of another arch i tect, n amed Scarpagn i n o ,who , although far in ferior to Giocon do , havin g securedt h e patron age of a Ven etian n oble

,an d havin g furn i shed

a less expensive design , saw it carried in to effect, to t h egreat gr ief of all t h e in tellige n t i n such m atte rs , an d tot h e great m or t ificat ion of Giocon do

,who regarded

him self as se t aside for a very un distin guished artist .Rem emberin g that h e saw Aleardi preferred t o h im , on

t h e t wo occasion s that t h e Republic solicit ed h i s advicetouchin g t h e lagoons an d t h e Rialto , h e was se ized within di gn ation , shook t h e dust from off h i s sandals at t h e

doors of t h e proud patrician s, an d set out for Rom e . Itwas in Rom e that Giocon do commenced h i s antiquarianan d archit ectural st udies— i t was there that h i s

’

youn gsoul received i t s earliest n otion s of Religion , History , an dArt

, an d at thi s advanced period of h i s life , must not h i s


gen erous an d n oble heart have been filled with thaten thusiasm which t h e Sight of t h e Holy City awaken si n t h e bosom of every Catholic— m ay, an d of every artist ?

There , h e stood on ce more am id t h e glor iou s m em ori alsof t h e past , w eighed down by years, no doubt , but witha soul that was still vigorou s . Havin g filled Europew ith h i s fam e

,h e n ow cou n ted on closin g “h i s days i n

t h e society of An gelo , Raffaello , an d of that gran dphalan x of in tellect , wh i ch was then sheddin g lustre onRom e . Leo X .

,t h e idol of artists

,h ad just then ascen ded

t h e Pon tifical thron e , an d t h e learn ed i n all t h e arts an dscien ces h ad com e to do hom age to the ir tiarad Macaen as .

Juli us Caesar Scaliger m en tion s Fr a Giocon do’s j ourn eyto Rom e i n t h e f ollowin g term s He then , as I haveheard , se t out for Ven ice , an d subsequen tly forRom e , to Pope Leo . I kn ow n ot whether this was

for h i s ben efit or n ot ; but I would deem it m iraculousif h e led a better life there than e lsewhere

,for h e

w as an exem plar of san ctity an d of u n iversal e r udi t i on .

”l

H avin g reached Rom e,perhaps i n March

, 1 5 1 4 ,

h e was presen t at Bram an te ’s death .

2 Th e Pon t ifl'

was overwhelm ed w ith sorrow for t h e loss of suchan illustrious architect, an d although Bram an te h ad

told h im, w ith h i s latest breath , that Raffaello alon e was

worthy to succeed h i m,

3 i n superin ten di n g t h e buildin g of

S . Peter’s , h e began to thin k that t h e Ur b i n ese was so

m u ch occupied with h i s pain tin gs, an d so li ttleaccustom ed to con ductin g buildin gs of such m agn itude ,that h e m ust n eeds b e assisted by som e architect of

celebrity . Havin g heard of Fr a G i ocon do’

s arrival i n

Th is author ity m ust disabuse those wh o hold that Fra Giocon do wen tto Ven i ce after havi n g spen t som e tim e at t h e bui ldin g of S. Peter’s.

3 Bram an te died on t h e m orn in g of t h e eleven th of March , 1 5 1 4.

3 Pun gileon i , Elogio di Raffaello, p . 1 60.


Rome , h e invited him to j oin Raffaello at this stupendousundert aking ; an d, h e added to t h e two , Gi ulian o da SanGallo , t h e Florentine .

’ Of this fact, so h ighly creditableto t h e name of Fr a Giocondo , w e have , alon g withVasari’s authority, a precious record, which h as beenpublished by Father Pun gileon i .

2 This i s a lett er ,addressed by Raffaello t o h i s un cle , Sim on e di Batti sta diCiarle da Urbin o , dated July 1 , 1 5 1 4 . About t h emiddle of t h e lette r h e expresses him self thus As tos taying i n Rom e , I m ay as well t ell you , that I can n otstay anywhere e lse , so devoted am I t o t h e buildin g ofS . Pe t er’s ; an d I n ow occupy t h e place of Bramante .

What place i s there i n t h e world which i s superior t oRome , or what undertakin g i s there great er than that ofS . Peter’s ? Th i s i s t h e greatest bui ldin g that h as everbeen see n , an d it must cost more than a million in gold.

You m ust know t hat t h e Pope h as de termin ed t o expend,on th is buildi n g, sixty thousan d ducats an n ually : in deed,h e does n ot thi nk of an yth i n g else . Th e Pope h as gi venm e , as my com panion , a m ost learned friar : h e is veryold , an d h as passed h i s e ightie th year. Th e Pope

,

knowin g that h e can not live lon g, appoi n t ed him to b emy colleague , for h e i s a m an of great reputation , an d

Vasari, i n h is Life of Giulian o da San Gallo, would m ake us doubtwhether this ar chitect h ad an y part i n t h e buildin g of S t . Peter ’s, as h ewrites, bein g worn down by old age an d a m alady that torm en ted h i m , h e

obtain ed leave fr om t h e Pope, an d return ed to Floren ce ; an d that charge( t h e buildin g of S . Peter’s) was en trus t ed to t h e graceful Raffaello daUrbi n o." Nevertheless, Pun gileon i proves that Giul ian o worked at t h e buildi n g, fr om Jan . 1 , 1 5 1 4 (duri n g Bram an te’s life) till 1 5 1 8 an d that h e waspai d fifteen ducats per m on th . M iliz ia h as fallen i n to an error when stati n gthat A n ton io da San Gallo, Giul ian o’s brother, was elected to that offi ce ; asAn ton io did n othi n g m ore than execut e t h e m odel of S. Peter’s, af t er Bram an te’s design . This m odel i s preserved i n t h e Vatican .

—V. Taia’s Descr i z.

del. Vat .3 Pun gileon i, Elogio di Raf.


strong arches, which , crossin g t h e groun d be n eath ,even tually supplied a n ew foun dation , on which t h e

whole fabric was thus placed without havin g sufferedin j ury or disturbance , while t h e buildin g was securedfrom all dan ger of further de t er ior at ion .

”I A m an uscr iptformerly belon gin g to Cardin al Bibbien a , was di scoveredi n t h e Chigi Library, at Rom e , by Father Pun gileon i ,an d this valuable documen t tells us what was t h e

am oun t of t h e stipen d gi ve n to t h e three archite cts durin gt h e buildin g of S . Pe ter’s. Un der date , March 2 7 , 1 5 1 8 ,we there fi n d t h e followi n g en try Fr a Giocon do , t h eVeron ese , receives 2 5 ducats per month . Up to t h epresen t, n o on e kn ew how lon g Fr a Giocon do was

em ployed at t h e bu ildin g, but this man uscript clearlyproves , that h e was engaged a t t h e works for fully fouryears .

2

Durin g t h e progress of this vast un dertakin g, which ofi tse lf was qu ite suffi cien t to absorb all h i s thoughts ,Giocon do n ever n eglected h i s beloved study of t h e Latinclassics . In 1 5 1 7 h e published a n ew edition of Caesar’sCom m en taries , with valuable addition s an d correction s ;an d h e also gave a design of t h e w onderful bridge whicht h e great gen eral threw across t h e Rhon e , an d of which h eh as left us a description i n h i s Com m en taries . Hithertovery few could form an exact n otion of this marvellous piece of Rom an pon toon in g .

3 He dedi cated thisedition t o Giulian o de ’ Medici , an d h e therein clearlyst ated that h e was rapidly approaching h i s earthly bourne .

I am n ow ,

” quoth h e , at that pe riod of life which

1 See G i ocon do’

s Life, tran slated by Mr s. Foster.3 Pun gileon i , loc. ci t . , p. 1 62 , tells us that Giocon do an d Raffaello werepaid 3 00 ducats per an n um ,

whi lst Giul ian o da San Gallo rece ived on ly 1 80.

3 Som e state that this edition of Julius Caesar was published i n 1 5 1 3 ; b utTi rab oseh i an d Echar d m ain tain that it saw t h e l ight i n Ven ice in 1 5 1 7.


w ill n ot allow m e t o prom ise you m uch m ore .

”

In fact,

h e was then alm ost i n h i s n in etieth year ; b u t even thisven erable age did n ot preven t h im from revisitin g h i sbeloved Veron a , if we m ay credit Bottari an d Ti r ab oseh i .We have already asserted , on Vasari

’

s authority, that Fr aGiocon do was em ployed to stren gthen a pier of t h ebridge which t h e Veron ese call Pon te Novo (t h e n ew

bridge) . Tipaldo ,‘ followin g other historian s

,says that

h e was en gaged at this work i n 1 5 1 2 ; an d h e , it wouldappear , asserts this on t h e authority of Vasari , who statesthat said pier was stren gthen ed durin g t h e soj ourn of t h eEm peror Maxim ilian i n Veron a. Bottari , however , i nh i s ann otation s to this biographer, labours to prove thatthis occurren ce took place A . D . 1 52 1 . Ti r ab oseh i

,i n t h e

con tin uation of Pietro Zagata’s Chron icle of Veron a ,published by Bian colin i , towards t h e close of 1 5 20, adds ,an d at this period was con structed t h e bridge calledDELLA PREDA

,which heretofore was of wood ”2 We will

here rem ark , that t h e operation suggested by Giocon do,of

bracing t h e pier , by m ean s of wooden stren gthen ers,which some assert was car ried in to effect , in 1 5 1 2 , i sn owise at varian ce with Zagata ’s narrative ; an d

, in deed ,m an y wooden bri dges h ad ston e piers, an d t h e piers oft h e Car r aja , at Floren ce , were con structed of ston e before1 3 3 0, though t h e rem ainder was form ed of wood . Fr a

Gi ocon do,therefore

,m ay have saved t h e pier from t h e

destruction with which it was threat en ed i n 1 5 1 2 , an d

t h e rest of t h e bridge m ay have been built of ston e in

Elogio,p. 2 3 .

3 Ti r ab oseh i , Lett. Ital.3 Masselli, i n a n ote to Vasar i’s Life of Giocon do

,m akes t h e followin g

statem en t, which is i rrecon ci lable with Zagata’s Sai d bridge was ofRom an con struction , b ut we have n ow on ly t wo ar ches of t h e an cien t tim es

t h e others havi n g been destroyed by t h e floods of t h e Adige, on e of which


Here en d our notices of t h e life an d works of Fr aGiocon do . We have vain ly sought t o ascertain when or

where h e di ed . Some affirm that h e term in ated h i searthly career i n Germany , at t h e Court of t h e Em perorMaxim ilian ; but we can n ot brin g ourselves to be lieve ,that t h e n on age n er i ari Friar would have left Alm ightyRome ,

”an d t h e Court of Leo X .

,t o fin d a grave i n

distant Germany.

There ar e som e geni uses, whose destin y seem s to b eun rest— souls that ar e constan tly dream in g of an idealperfection , which i s far beyond t h e condition of our

m iserable nature . People of this character ar e contin ually im pe lled to vary the ir studies, occupation s, pr ofessions , n ay, an d even their locality, ever an d always

yearnin g for t h e b et ter that eludes them ,an d of which

years can n ot disenchant them . In a word, there is n o

rest for t h e soles of their feet. Such,in deed , was t h e

characte r of our Fr a Giocon do . Although educated i nt h e D omi n ican Order, which h as, at all tim es, allowedample tim e for studies con gen ial t o t h e tastes of i t s

m em bers , as well as am ple exercise for t h e extern alfaculties , it does not appear to have harm on ised with t h enotion s of this arden t an d labori ous spirit. It m ay b e ,

that h e shran k from t h e silence an d seclusion of t h e

cloister , or that i n ter i or life h ad no charm for h im . Be

that as it m ay, we easily collect from h i s dedication toJulius II .

, that h e was given t o ramblin g , t o t h e alte rn ationof pursui ts

, an d, in a word , to that state of restlessnesswhich can n ever b e satisfied . Withal

,there ar e few am on gst

t h e learned who have rendered more services to t h epublic than di d this Fr iar of Verona. To h im we ar e

occurr ed in 1 5 1 2 , an d gave room for t h e exer cise of Fra Giocon do‘

s

gen ius, as h e executed t h e work in


imitation of t h e Paolesque design , t h e ar tist h as therepainted a magn ificent cupola

,restin g on arches an d

colum n s , an d so adm irable i s t h e m an agem en t of t h eperspective an d Chiaroscuro

,that on e m ay alm ost fan cy

it t o b e , n ot an illusion ,but a true work of e legan t archi

tecture . Above t h e cupola, on t h e right an d left, in two

medallion s, ar e t h e Evan ge lists , Mark an d John . In t h e

centre of t h e tem ple , se ated on a lofty thron e,i s t h eVi rgi n ,

wi th h er divin e Son i n h er arm s ; an d at h er feet, (as i nFr a Bar t olom m eo

’

s com position s ,) there i s a little An ge lplayin g a lut e . Then come t h e worshippers of t h e Sonan d Mother ; on t h e right ar e S . Dom in ic

,S . Nicholas,

an d t h e Blessed Ben edictXI ; an d on t h e left we beheldS . Thom as ofAquin o

,S . Jer om , an d S . Liberale .

For fully two cen tur ies n o on e could ascertain whowas t h e author of this glorious work ; but t h e richn ess oft h e com position , t h e beauty of t h e colourin g , an d t h e

exqui site expression of t h e attitudes an d coun ten an ces ,together with t h e adm irable han dlin g of t h e perspective ,le ft n o doubt that it was t h e

‘ creation of some greatpainter of t h e Ven etian school , which never lackedillustrious masters. Som e fan cied it t h e work of t h eBellin i school , som e attributed it to Tiziano , an d othersto Giorgion e di Castelfran co ; n ay, there were som e whofan cied they recogn ised i n it t h e han d an d style of thatBas tian o del Piom bo , whom Michelan giolo in voked t o

ecli pse h i s rival Raffaello , an d h i s whole school. Atlen gth Father Federici discovered i n t h e archives of t h econ ven ts of S . John an d Paul , i n Ven ice , an d of S .

Nicholas i n Trevigi , most authen tic docum en ts whichproved that this pain tin g was executed by two Ven e tianartists of S . Dom in ic’s Order, who , up to t h e t ime of t h e

publication of h i s Tr evigi an Mem oirs , i . e.,till 1 803 ,

were bur ied in profoun d oblivion . These ar e t h e Fathers

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S 1 7 1

Marco Pen sab en , an d Marco Mar aveja, both priests oft h e con ven t of S . John an d Paul in Ven ice . Th e noticescon cern in g t h e first ar e copious ; but we can n ot say as

much con cern in g t h e secon d , of whom there i s on lypassin g m en tion i n t h e an cien t records.

Fr a Marco Pen sab en was born in Ven i ce , A . D . 1 486 .

Of h i s paren ts , an d of h i s boyhood, we know n othin g .

Similar darkn ess overclouds t h e in fan cy of h i s com patriotsan d con freres , Fr a Fran cesco Colon n a an d Fr a Giocon do .

Th e oldest an d best authen ticated m em oir which we

have of Pen sab en ,i s dated 1 5 1 0, an d it in form s us , that

h e was then a priest i n t h e con ven t of SS . John an d

Paul, i n h i s own coun try . Thi s docum en t i s a n oteaddressed to t h e Provin cial , on t h e 20t h of May of t h esam e year, an d it sets forth , that Fr a Marco was the ntwenty-four years of age , an d that h e was on e of t h e lastof those who h ad taken t h e Dom in ican habit i n thatcon ven t .l Subsequen tly we fi n d m en tion of h im i n t h e

CapitularAc t s of the years, 1 5 1 4 , an d in t h efir st of these , un der date March 7

,h e i s called sub -prior ;

an d that of 1 52 4 , states that h e h ad been elected headSacristan .

2 In t h e j ourn al of t h e church an d con ve n t ofS . Nicholas (Trevigi) , which was con tin ued from 1 5 1 0 to1 52 9 , we find en tries of all t h e sum s expen ded for t h e

pain ti n g of t h e great altar-piece of that church ; an d t h e

first of them i s dated March 7 , 1 5 20. On t h e 1 3 t h ofApril , it appears that a certain Victor Belli n i an o cam e

to Trevigi , deputed by Fr a Marco Pen sab en , to Sign a

con tract with t h e r eligion s of that con ven t ; an d that h ereceived by way of an in stalm en t, forty-n in e lire an d

twelve soldi . On t h e 2 4t h of t h e sam e mon th , Pe n sab encame to Trevigi ; an d we fi n d un der date , May 4 , t h e

l Feder ici,Mem . Trevig.

,vol. i. Loc. cit.


entries of various sum s expen ded on h im as h e was thensick . Th e on ly m en tion we have of Mar aveja , i s datedAugust 1 1 t h , of t h e sam e mon th ; an d we ther e find thath e h ad received six lire , on accoun t of said pain ti n g. Th e

last entry relatin g to Fr a Marco Pen sab en,bears dat e

Jan . 1 3,

This Fr a Marco Pen sab e n ,who certain ly w as n ot

another Fr a An gelico , but rather resem bled that bizarregenius, Fr a F . Colon n a , left t h e picture half fin ished an d

then disappeared from Trevigi . For a lon g tim e therewere no tidin gs of h im

,though t h e com mun i ty sought

t h e fugitive in Padua , Monsalice , Legn ago , an d elsewhere .

2 Despairin g of ever again settin g -the ir eyes on

this artist, t h e Fathers of S . Nicholas , whether it was

that they h ad n o t con fiden ce i n Mar aveja , or that h e ,t oo

,h ad disappeared , dete rm in ed to have t h e pain tin g

fin i shed ; an d they , therefore , in vited Gian Gi rolam o , an da compan ion of h i s, who were Ven e tian pai n ters, t o com

ple t e t h e work , as appears by a con t ract signed on t h e 8t hof Septem ber , 1 52 1 . Two years m ore passed by withoutan y tidin gs of Pen sab en . In 1 52 4 we find h im i n Ve n ice ,still wearin g t h e Dom in ican habit ; but in 1 530, t h eauthen tic books of t h e Order e n um erate h im amon gstt h e religious , wh o h ad e ither cast off the ir habit or died .

OfMar aveja there i s n o further m en tion .

These fragm en tary n otices suggest t h e followi n g i n

qui ryz— How could a pain ter of such genius— a pain ter

who executed a work so pe rfect that it was attribut ed toTizian o , Giorgion e , an d Sebastian o del Piom bo— have

l Loc. cit.3 In this j ourn al, un der date July 1 6, 1 52 1 , we r ead, On t h e l 6 t h a sum

of m on ey was given t o Fr a Alvise, wh o was charged to go to Padua,Mon seli ce, e t c. i n search of Fr a Marco Pen sab en , an d in duce h i m t o com e

back an d fin ish t h e altar-piece i n Trevigi .

1 74 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS .

an extraordi nary work , on wh i ch they spared no outlay .

And , if Fr a Marco was kn own , what other work of h is

i n Ven ice or Trevigi have you to prove it ? Again ,where h as an y on e heard or read , i n Pictorial History;of such a m aster as Fr a Marco Pe n sab en ? We

m ust, therefore , con clude that h e pain ted un der an othern ame an d cogn om en , an d that h e was kn own as

Pen sab en ,on ly whilst h e was executi n g t h e far -fam ed

altar-piece of Trevigi. But all t h e characteristics ofthat work , ar e peculiar to t h e gen ius an d pen cil of Fr aBastian del Piom bo . Le t us see ifFr a Marco Pen sab en ,

t h e Domin ican , was also Bastian di Ven ezia , BastianLucian i , an d fin ally Fr a Bastian del Piom bo .

”

That Fr a Marco Pen sab en was iden tical with Bastianda Ven ezia , is eviden t from t h e Chr on ology , i . e.

, t h e

series of t h e years of t h e li fe of Fr a Bastian del Piom bon ay, this i s still more eviden tly establi shed by h i swhim sical an d extravagan t gen ius ; by h i s slowness an dvolubility , for which h e h as been taken to task byVasari an d Tolome i— n eed we say, that t h e pain tin g inTrevigi i s an eviden ce of these t wo defects — n eed youmore to establish this iden tity —i f so

,look to t h e style

of h i s pai n ti n g, which i s in every respect sim ilar to thatwhich characterises t h e works executed by Bastiano i nVenice , Rom e , Viterbo , Perugia, an d Naples. At page1 2 4

,Feder i ci con jectures that afte r Sebas tiano Lucian i

h ad competed with Raffae llo i n Rome , duri n g t h e earlype riod of t h e Pon t ificat e of Julius t h e Secon d

,h e was so

chagri n ed by h i s sign al defeat, that h e aban don ed Rom e ,

an d proceeded t o Ven ice , where h e concealed him selfan d h is sham e in t h e Dominican con ven t, which at thatperiod coun ted two kin smen of h i s am on gst i t s brotherhood : these were Marc An ton io , an d Giulio Lucian i .“ Here , quoth Fede rici ,

“ having taken t h e n ame of

S CULPTORS , AND ARCHITECT S. 1 75

Marco , in stead of Sebastian o, an d t h e cognom e n of

Pe n sab en ,i n lieu of Lucian i , h e was persuaded by h i s

kin sm e n to take t h e Dom in ican habit .” He then goeson to say that h e was in vited (whilst still a Dom in icani . e.

,i n to com e to Trevigi , to pain t t h e gran d

altar -piece , an d that h i s re lative , Giulio Lucian i , wasthen actually i n that con ven t, an d that when h e heardof Raffaello’s death , which occurred on t h e Good-Fr i dayl

of that sam e year , Sebastian o Lucian i cast off h i s habit,an d t h e assum ed n am e of Pe n sab e n ,

an d se t ou t forRome , to betake him self on ce more to pain tin g. Here

,

however, h e rem ain ed on ly a Short tim e , for on t h e

accession of Pope Adr ian VI .

, (h e srrcceeded Leo

who cared very little for t h e Fin e Ar t s,our pain ter

thought it wiser to take t h e cowl on ce m ore ; an d it i s forthis reason that t h e Registry of t h e Ven etian con ven tmen tion s him as Marco Pe n sab en ,

i n 1 5 2 4 . Theseextraordin ary tran sform ation s were n ot com pleted ye t ;fo r when Clem en t VII. ascen ded t h e thron e

, t h e artistsbegan to hope for better thin gs, an d Sebas tian o Luciani ,havin g on ce m ore uncowled him self, retur n ed to Rom e ,

where h e associated himse lf with Michelan giolo , an d

labour ed with that Sovereign Master, to outshin eRaffaello’s scholars , for which h e rece ived t h e office of a

rl/[ on lc of t h e Lead . I will n ot den y that it was qu iteusual for t h e Friars to resum e an d cast off their habit-son t h e m ost frivolous pretexts ; but , I wi ll n ot adm itthat these chan ges of n am e

,habit

,an d con dition should

b e looked upon as facts , supported by eviden ce . It i sn ot t h e part of a pruden t m an to give credence to everycon jecture .

It m ay n ot b e ou t of place to rem ark, that Raffaello di ed,

on Good Friday,

1 5 2 0 an d that Fr a Marco Pen sab en di d n ot disappear from Trevigi tillea r ly i n t h e July of 1 52 1 , i .e. a year an d a half after San zio ’s dem ise.

1 76 MEMOIRS or EMINEN'I’ PAINTERS

,

Th e last argument that Feder i ci advan ces t o sust ainh i s assumption , i s n ot more convincin g than t h e first.Giovanni da Udine , quoth h e , Braman te Vani , an d

Guglielmo della Porta, were for some tim e clerks of t h eL ead , but they n ever styled them selves B r ot h er s , (Frati ,)as Sebastiano Lucian i always signed him self i n h i s letters ;hen ce , we must believe that h e belon ged to a religiousin stitute ; an d as h i s method of colourin g resem bles thatof Marco Pen sab en , t h e Domin ican , it i s evident that itw as t h e sam e painter , un der two different names .

”

Federici , therefore , con cludes that un til we prove byn ew documen ts , that Sebastiano Luciani pain t ed as a

laym an , from 1 5 1 0, to 1 52 4 , in Rom e , Ven ice , an d

elsewhere , we must fail to convince him that Fr a MarcoPen sab en an d Sebast iano Lucian i ar e two distinctperson s.

l

These , if I m istake not, ar e t h e prin cipal argumentsan d they ar e sufficiently prolix— on which Feder i cirelies. But, though it might b e flatterin g t o our amourpropre to claim an artist of Luci an i ’s meri t for t h e Ordert o which we belong, truth must b e preferred t o everySelfish in terest. We h ave already endeavoured to provethat Fr a Giocondo was for some tim e a Dom in ican , an d

w e will now show that Sebastiano never was such, an d

that h e was Sim ply a B r ot h er of t h e L ead , or as somewould say, of t h e S ign et .Federi ci ’s argumen ts m ay b e reduced to three — 1 st .

Th e resem blan ce of t h e pain tin gs , an d of t h e capriciousgenius of t h e two artists . 2 n d . Th e con sonan ce of t h echron ology . 3 r d . Th e designat ion of Friar (Frate) or

brother best owed on Sebastiano Luciani . As t o t h e first,if a resemblance of style or genius should b e taken , as

Mem orie Trevigian e.


Luciani , when h e ob t ained t h e offi ce of t h e sign et . Itwas usually conferred, according to Ser afi n o Razzi , on

t h e lay-monks of t h e Cist ercian Order, an d every secular

w h o obtain ed t h e appoin tm en t took t h e habit an d

n omen clature of this In stitute . For exam ple, we have

seen how Fr a Marian o Fe tti aban don ed t h e Dom in icanhabit, an d took that of S . Bernard , as soon as h e was

prom oted to b e a“ B r ot h er of t h e Lead .

” But suchrem arks ought not to have been n ecessary for such a

m an as Federici , w h o must have kn own that m an y otherartists , on their elevation t o this offi ce , took t h e name of

B r ot h er . Could h e not have foun d i n Vasari thatGuglielm o della Por ta, t h e Milan ese Sculptor, an d

disciple ofAn gelo , after h e h ad received this hon our , wasalways addressed as Frat e Guglielm o ? He should haveread t h e life of Benven uto Celli n i , if h e n eeded fii r t h erproof.‘

Le t us n ow answer h i s last argument— n am ely , thatt h e on ly w ork produced by an artist so eminent as Fr aMarco Pen sab en , was t h e Tr evigi an altar-piece . In fact

,

we can poin t to m any pain ters who did n ot produce morethan on e or two pain tin gs ; an d a sin gular in stance ofthis m ay b e found i n t h e person of our Fr a Carnovale ,w h o

,for a lon g tim e

, was thought to have executed n o

picture , save that which i s n ow i n t h e Im perial Galleryof t h e Brera, at Milan ; but as for Pen sab en , we can

show that h e did pain t an other picture . In t h e galleryof Coun t Loch i s, of Bergamo , there i s a sm all pain tin g ,i n adm irable preservation , concern in g t h e originality of

which there can b e n o doubt,as t h e artist signed i t with

l Ben ven uto’s L ife, written by him self, chap. xi. “ Fin di n g that t h ePope h as n ever rem em bered t o give m e an ythin g, an d seein g that there wasa vacan cy for a b r oth er qf th e Lead, I on e n ight asked h im for i t .”


h i s nam e . Th is pictur e represen ts t h e B . V. M., w ithh er Son i n h er arm s. At h er Side i s a holy bishop ,(a Dom in ican Sain t ,) an d before h er i s a Friar of t h esam e Order, who h as h i s han ds j oin ed devoutly i n t h e

attitude of prayer. Some thin k that this i s t h e portraitof t h e pain ter. Th e B . V. i n attestation of h er patronage ,lays h er hand on t h e head of t h e supplian t, an d t h e

In fan t blesses h i m . Th e groun d of t h e picture i s a

b eaut ifirl lan dscape , with a con ven t an d church , whi ch ,perhaps, we re de signed to represen t t h e san ctuary an d

domicile of t h e Artist. In i t s upper part we read on a

scroll Fr a Marcus Ven et us Pictor .” Th e colouri ngi s of t h e Belli n i style , an d it i s on e of t h e rarest an d mostbeautiful w orks of t h e old Ven e tian school .Feder ici him self men tions t wo portraits by Pen sab en ,

as actually existin g i n t h e con ven t of San Nicolo , at

Trevigi . On e of them i s t h e liken ess of Fr a AlbertoArpo , foun der of t h e Tr evigi an Conven t, an d t h e other i sthat of Fr a Leon ardo Er m i zio , founder of t h e con ven t ofC i vi dale .

l They form par t of t h e gallery of Illustri ousDom in icans, chiefly execut ed by t h e pain ter Bern ardi n oCastello , in con tinuation of that

,which Tom m aso da

Moden a frescoed i n t h e sam e con ven t in t h e fourteenthcen tury. Thi s proves that Fr aMarco Pen sab en did morethan pain t t h e Tr evigi an altar-piece . Though tim e an d

m an m ay have destroyed m an y works by this religious,they have left us en ough to establi sh h i s claim to a

di st in guished place amongst t h e m ost perfect disciples oft h e Venetian school .

Mem orie Trevigian e, vol. 2 , p. 2 2 7.

1 80 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS

CHAPTER XI .

Fra Guglielm o Marcillat, a celebrat ed pain ter on glass, Architect an d Pain ter-His Works i n Rom e, i n Corton a, i n Arezzo, an d i n Perugia.

I WAS for a lon g time in doubt where I ought to writet h e life of Fr a Gugli eh n o di Marcillat ; or follow t h e

exam ple of Malvasia , i n t h e Felsina Pi t t r i ce ,I an d givet h e mem oir that Vasar i h as written , simply addi ng suchn otices as I have been able to collect concerning thisdistin guished artist. No on e , surely, can flatter himselfwith t h e idea of bein g able to excel Vasari i n elegan ceof style ; an d m ost in dubitably n o other biographer wasbetter fitted to treat ofMarcillat than was Vasar i , who contem poraneously with Ben edetto Spadar i , st udi ed t h e ar t

of pain tin g under t h e subj ect of this mem oir. Vasari’sn arrative , therefore , m ay b e regarded as a very elegan tliterary performance , as well as an affectionate tribut e ofh i s grati tude . I have , therefore , resolved to cull t h echiefest port ions of what is to follow from t h e grandhistorian of our Arts ; an d to in terpose from tim e totim e between t h e reader an d t h e biographer, actin g t h epart of a prom pter when ever t h e mem ory of t h e latterbecom es defective . I shall st udy, however, to avoid allprolix

, an d useless digression s.

Mar cillat’

s birth-place was for a lon g tim e unkn own .

Vasari , who at on e tim e calls it Marcilla , an d at anotherMar zilla, caused many to conclude that h e was born i n

Such is t h e t i tle of Malvasia ’

s Lives of t h e Bologn ese Pai n ters.

1 82 MEMOIRS or EM INENT PAINTERS,

Louis le Gros, th i s ar t was cheri shed i n that country ; tilli t at last attain ed to wonderful perfection i n t h e days ofPi n aigr i e r , Jean Cousin ,

Bernar d Palissy, an d An gr an d .

l

But Marcillat was destined to rai se it t o that degree ofexcellen ce which i s un paralleled in an y place , or form erperiod. Th e m otive that in duced this Fren ch artist t oente r t h e cloister , i s told us by h i s biographer, thusY ieldin g to t h e im portun ities of h i s kin sm en ,

h e was

presen t when an en em y of the irs was slain , an d h e was

thusforced t o take t h e habit of a Dom in ican i n h i s owncountry , in order to escape t h e court an d justice .

2

A n d although , (adds t h e biographer ,) h e rem ain ed i nReligion ,

h e never aban don ed t h e studyof ar t ; but, ont h e con trary , by con tin uin g it , arrived at great per fection .

” From this, we con clude , that t h e religious gavehim am ple scope an d every facility to cultivate glasspai n tin g ; an d that h e m ust have spen t a con siderabletime in t h e clois ter, i n order to arrive at that elegancefor which h e i s fam ed . In t h e first volum e of theseMem oirs we h ave Shown that man y of h i s con frerespract ised glass-pai ntin g in Italy ; an d we have spoken a t

length of Fr a Bartolommeo di Pie tro , who pain ted t h egreat win dow of t h e choir of San Dom en ico in Perugia,as well as of t h e Blessed Jam es ofUlm , an d h i s variousan d excellen t disciples i n this ar t . Bu t Fr a Guglielm odi Marcillat outshon e them all.

Whi lst Marcillat was livin g i n h i s con ven t, whollydevoted to religion , h e form ed an in tim acy with a certainClaude , a very able artist ; an d , probably it was this m an

Bourasse, Archeologie C h r et ien n e, p. 2 5 1 .

V. Vasar i. We m ay here rem i n d t h e reader that t h e eccen tr ic Ben ven uto Cell in i took r efuge i n S . Maria Novella, at Floren ce, an d escaped then cefr om h is pursuers, (with whom h e h ad been en gaged i n a brawl,) disguised asa Dom in ican Friar.

SCULPI‘

ORS , AND ARCHITECT S . 1 83

who in i tiated h im i n t h e ar t of glass-pain tin g. Th e

precepts an d works of this Claude helped to pe rfectMarcillat i n th i s m ost difficult ar t , which h as t o con ten dagain st t h e di fficulties of t h e very fragile material , n ay,

an d of t h e fi r e in which t h e glass must b e prepared .

Mean while ,” quoth Vasari , Pope Julius II. h ad com

m ission ed t h e archit ect , Bram an te , to cause n um erouswin dows i n pain t ed-glass to b e prepared for h i s palace ,when it chan ced that t h e latte r , makin g in quiry for t h emost di stin guished am on g those em ployed in that bran chof ar t , rece ived in telli gen ce respectin g certain m asterswho were then executin g adm irable works of t h e kin d i nFra n ce , an d h ad t h e opportun ity of exam in in g a specim en by m ean s of t h e Fren ch am bassador, who was thenat t h e court of h i s Holin ess ; this was a win dow en closedwithin a fram e , which t h e am bassador h ad i n h is study ,an d whereon w as a figure pain t ed with various colourson white glass , which h ad aft erwards been subm itted tot h e action of fi r e . Letters were thereupon wri tten toFrance , by order of Bram ante , requestin g those m astersto proceed to Rom e , an d offerin g them liberal appoin tmen ts . Claude , therefore , a Fren chm an , an d t h e chiefof that vocation ,

havin g received this in telligen ce , an d

knowin g t h e excellen ce of Guglielm o , eas ily in duced himby mon ey an d fair prom ises, to leave h i s brethren of t h e

cloist er ; n or was it di fficult , in deed , to separate h im fromthose mon ks, see in g that t h e di scour tesies which h e h adexperien ced at the ir han ds, an d t h e envious jeers whichar e con stan tly i n action am on g them ,

h ad ren dered himm ore desirous to depart than Master Claude was to rem oveh im then ce .

”l We m ust here In terrupt Vasari , i n orde rto m ake a reflection , which i s suggest ed by t h e love we

Vasari’s Lives, v. Boh n ’s edition .


cherish for our In s titute . We have already stat ed whatcaused Marcillat to en r ol himself amon gst t h e Dom in ican s ;it was not surely a vocation from heaven , such as wouldhave sustain ed h im i n t h e ob ser van ce of r igid d iscipli n e ,

nor a n aspi r a t ion f or a n im m or tal palm , but rather t h efear of human j ustice whi ch pursued t h e author, whosoever h e m ayhave been , of that r ed atrocity . Ne ither doI know whether m on ey a n d fa i r pr om ises should b eregarded as an hon ourable motive for flyin g from t h e

cloister : t h e e n com ium ,therefore , if Vasari m ean t it as

such , i s certain ly very equivocal . Supposin g it t o b e

true, we m ust stigm atise Marcillat as ven al an d m ercen ary

,

an d charge him with attachin g m ore im por tance to t h eprom ises of lucre than to t h ese solem n oa t h s wh ich h e h ad

swor n a t t h e foot of t h e altar . Vasari , however , as

though h e h ad forgott en all that h e previously wrote ,e lsewhere rem arks Rem or se of con scien ce afilie t ed h i m

f or h avi n g left t h e b r et h r en . For h e

felt t h a t h e was un der m a n y ob liga t ion s to t h e r eligious .

”

Assuredly h e was in deb t ed to them , if n o t for h i s life , atleast for h i s liberty , which was equally dear an d precious .

N0 on e , however, will won der at Vasari’

s acerbity , if webear in min d that this writer i s n ever don e snarlin g at

t h e Friars , from whom h e rece ived very lar ge sums, an dwho

,very im providen tly , gave h i m m an y works t o

execut e . Whosoever desires to learn h ow cr uelly thisAretin e lacerat ed t h e lives an d works of t h e mostsplen did an d praiseworthy artists of h i s age , h as on ly t oread h i s m em oirs of Pie tro Per ugino , Pinturicchio , an d

Francesco Fran cia.

Mast er Claude an d Fr a Guglieh n o havin g settled i nRome , began to pain t m an y win dows for t h e Pon tificalpalace , which no longer exist. Two

,however , executed

b y them , still remain i n t h e church of Santa Maria del


cont emplat es t his devou t an d affectin g scen e . At foot oft h e composition t h e pain ter wrote : Quem gen ui t

ador avi t .”l

Th e Adorat ion of t h e Magi i s con ceived thus — Th eVirgin i s seated , whilst t h e In fan t, stan din g erect on HisMother’s kn ees, blesses t h e prostrat e Magi w h o adoreHim : behin d them i s a num erous train of footm en an d

horses. All these figures ar e life size . Th e design i scorrect an d gran d ; t h e expression of t h e heads of all t h efigures i s very beau tiful , b u t that of t h e Virgin i s som e

what ignoble ; t h e nude o f t h e Child i s we ll design ed ;an d t h e em broideries , an d other orn am en ts , ar e won derfully exquisite . These two win dows ar e true pictures of excellen t com position . Wh at I deem m ost praiseworthy , i s t h efin ish of t h e whole work ; for t h e outlin es of t h e nude ar e

design ed with t h e greatest precision , con trary to t h eusage of t h e Quattrocen tisti , whose designs in glpain tin gs were very feeble . Th e m an agemen t of t h e

tints, an d t h e freshn ess an d tran sparen cy of t h e colourin g,

ar e here far more excellen t than i n an y other work of t h esort , no matter at what period it m ay have beenexecuted .

Count Tommaso Passerin i h as preserved t h e paint edglass of two sm all win dows , an d h as en cased it in fourfr am es, each of which i s two an d-a-half palm s high .

Each of these h as a sym bolical figure of Pruden ce , Fort i t ude , Tc1n per an ce , an d Justice : these ar e represen tedin t h e style which Raffaello subsequently followed i n

t h e Loggie of t h e Vatican . We will not att em pt t odescribe t h e beauty of these four figures, which ar e

correctly design ed , an d exqui si t ely coloured ; but, alas !they ar e n ow so much in jured , that little of them

Hi m whom sh e bare sh e adored.”


remain s. I thin k that these ar e t h e iden tical windowswhich Vasari says were pain ted by Marcillat

,for

Cardi n al Passer i n i . l But let us follow our biographeAt t h e tim e when , as we have said , Guglielm o wasdwelli n g i n Corton a, Fabian o di St agio Sassoli of

Ar ezzo , departed this life , i n that city. This artist h adbeen an excellen t m aster i n t h e pain tin g of largewin dows, for which reason , t h e superin ten dent of works ,for t h e Episcopal Church

,h ad given a com m ission to

S t agi o , son of t h e above -n am ed Fabian o , an d to t h e

painter Dom en ico Pecori , to prepare three win dows forthat buildi n g ; they ar e i n t h e prin cipal chapel , an d ar e

each twen ty braccia i n height. But when these workswere com pleted, an d t h e win dows fixed in the ir places ,they di d n ot e n tirely satisfy t h e people of Arezzo ,although they were , in fact , tolerably well don e— n ay,

ar e rather praiseworthy than not. Now , it chan ced at

t his tim e , that Messer Lodovico Bellich i n i , an em inentphysician

, an d then govern in g t h e city of Arezzo , wascalled on to repair to Corton a

,there to atten d t h e

mother of t h e above-n am ed Cardin al ; h e then becamewell acquain ted with Guglielm o , with whom ,

when h e

h ad tim e,h e always con versed very gladly ; Guglielmo ,

too, on h i s part , who was then called t h e Prior, from

havin g, just about that tim e , rece ived t h e b en efice of a

Pri ory , con ceived a cordi al frien dship for that physician .

Th e latter , therefore , on e day asked h i m if h e would b ewi llin g to proceed to Arezzo , for t h e purpose of paintin gcertain win dows i n that city , provided t h e con sen t of t h eCardi nal could b e obtain ed ; whe n , havin g rece ived h i s

When Guglielm o cam e to Rom e h e h ad n ot practised drawin g m uch ;

b ut kn ow in g h i s deficien cy i n thi s particular,h e applied him self to t h e study

of i t , an d h e soon gave m arvellous proofs of h i s p r oficien cy, as m ay b e seen

i n t h e w in dows which h e pain ted for t h e Cardin al i n Corton a.

”—Vasari .

1 88 m an om s or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

promise to that eff ect, Messer Lodovico , with t h e per

mission of t h e Cardi n al , con ducted him thither. ThenS t agi o , havin g separated him self from t h e compan y ofDom en ico , received Guglielm o in to h i s house , an d t h e

latter , for h i s first work in Arezzo , painted a picture ofS . Lucia, i n t h e chape l of t h e Albergotti Fam ily, whichi s in t h e Episcopal Church of that city .

1 Th e subjectof this work i s t h e above-m en tion ed Sain t , who i s

depicted together with San Silvestro , an d both ar e so

beautifully don e , that they m ay b e truly said to presentt h e appearan ce , not of mere figures i n coloured an d

transparen t glass, but of most an im ated an d life-likebein gs, fully equal , at t h e very least, to what we findaccom plished i n t h e most adm ired an d excellen tpaintin gs . Of Guglielm o’s works it i s to b e remarked ,that i n addition to h i s masterly m ethod of tr eatin g t h e

Carn ation s, they exhibit other peculiarities, on e of whichI will n ow describe . It was h i s frequen t custom t o scaleor grind away t h e glass i n certain places, when , havin gremoved t h e outer surface , h e would afterwards colourthat part with an other h ue ; on r ed glass for example ,thus sealed , h e would im pose a yellow colour , or wouldlay white or green on a blue glass, which i s an exceedi n gly difficul t operation i n that branch of t h e ar t . Bythis process , t h e real or first colour i s that which alon e

We have n ot ascertain ed precisely at what period Fr a Guglielm o visi t edAr ezzo, b ut it would appear that h e wen t thither i n 1 5 1 9, for Gaye h as di scover ed a docum en t un der date Oct ob . 3 1 , of that year, r elative to an

en gagem en t between t h e bui lders of t h e cathedral of Arezzo, an d Fra

Guglielm o. Th e followi n g is a fragm en t of it Th e builders of t h e cathedral have em ployed Master Guglielm o di Pietro to pain t t h e glass win dows,i . e., a w in dow over t h e Chapel of S . h an d s ; a w in dow over t h e chapel ofS. Matthew a w i n dow over t h e chapel of S . N icholas

,a t 1 5 l ireper braccio.

Th e glass m ust b e prepared i n t h e fi r e, n ot w ith oil ; an d h e m ust have themfin ished b efore t h e Jun e of 1 52 — Carteggio In edi t o.


inven tion , design , colour , or t h e genera l excellence of t h ework .

In t h e Episcopal Church of Arezzo ,Guglielmo execut edt h e large rose win dow whereon i s depicted t h e Descen tof t h e Holy Ghost an d t h e Baptism of Christ by John .

‘

He h as represen ted Our Lord stan din g in t h e Jordan ,

an d waitin g on S . John,who h as taken a vessel of wat er

i n h i s han d , with which h e i s about to baptize OurSaviour . An old m an , already divest ed of h is clothes,i s standin g n ear , i n t h e act of takin g off h i s shoes , whilstcertain an gels ar e takin g charge of t h e Redeem er’s garmen ts. Over t h e en tire group i s t h e Alm ighty Father ,wh o sen ds down t h e Holy Spirit on Hi s Son .

"1 Th i sw in dow 1 8 im mediately over t h e baptism al fon t of t h ecathedral ; an d i n t h e sam e buildin g Guglielm o pain teda wi n dow ,

whereon i s represen ted t h e Resurrection ofLazarus. It i s di fficult to imagin e h ow t h e m aster h asbeen able to arran ge so m an y figures i n such appropriateattitudes

,on a surface so very lim ited, nor can we fail

to perceive t h e expression of terror an d am azem ent inthat crowd of people , at this callin g of t h e dead to life .

Their perception of t h e fetor exhaled from t h e body ofLazarus, i s equally m an ifest ; while t h e tears of em otion ,

an d t h e rej oicin g of h i s sisters, ar e also fin ally expressed.

They still exist, b ut are som ewhat in jur ed. Such of th em as have beenbroken , were substituted by white glass.These pain tin gs were m uch dam aged, b ut have been adm irably restored

by Raim on do Zabelli of Arezzo, an artist of our own tim es. Gaye, loc.cit., produces an other docum en t relatin g to two other win dows pain t ed byFr a Gugliel. I t i s dated Jt m e ls t

, 1 5 2 2 : On e over t h e altar of S . Fran cis,an d t h e other over t h e Baptistery. He m ust rem ove t h e actual w i n duws,a n d h ave t h e whole work com pleted by n ext Novem ber. On t h e 3 rd ofMarch,1 5 2 4

,h e received for a pain ti n g (on glam ) of t h e Wom an taken i n Adul

tory, an d for a Flagellation , 660 lire.

”


In thi s work ar e m an y in stan ces of those excoriation san d over-layin g of colours on t h e glass , which we havedescribed above , an d every part of t h e whole , even t h emost m in ute , does certain ly exhibit t h e utm ost animation ,each i n i t s separate kin d an d place . Whoever shalldesire to ascertain of what t h e skilful han d of t h e Priorh as been capable , le t h im exam i n e t h e win dow of S .

Matthew , an d le t him observe t h e adm irable com positionof t h e history there depicted ; for i n this h e m ay im aginethat h e sees Christ truly i n t h e flesh . Th e Saviour i srepresen ted as callin g S . Matthew from t h e m on eychan ger

’

s ben ch , an d t h e latter exte n din g h i s arm s— as

on e who would receive t h e Redeem er to h i s in mostheart— aban don s t h e riches h e h as am assed , thus evin cin gh i s readin ess to leave all thin gs, an d follow h i s Master.At t h e foot of a fli ght of steps i s seen on e of t h e Apostleslyi n g asleep , wh i le an other i s i n t h e act of awakin g him

,

whi ch h e does w ith extrem e vivacity of m ovem ent .Equally excellen t i s t h e figure of San Piero , who i s incon versation with San Giovan n i , both of whom ar e so

exqui sitely beautiful , that they appear to b e t h e work ofdivin e han ds . In this sam e win dow there ar e , besides ,perspective views of tem ples, flights of stairs , an d otheraccessories. Th e figures ar e so adm irably grouped ,an d t h e lan dscapes so well depicted , that n o on e wouldever suppose them to b e m ere pain tin gs, but ratheran gelic production s sen t down from heaven for t h econ solation of m an ! Guglielm o pain ted t h e win dowof San An ton io , an d that of San Niccolo i n t h e samechurch

,both of which ar e exceedi n gly beautiful ;

I h e

also executed two others i n that buildin g. On e of theserepresen ts t h e Saviour expellin g t h e buyers an d sellers

These t wo win dows do n ot exist.


from t h e Temple , t h e other i s t h e history of t h e womant aken in adultery , an d these works ar e truly admirable .

Indeed , so man y were t h e talen ts an d good qualities oft h e Prior Guglielmo , an d so highly was h e appreciatedby t h e people of Arezzo , that h e fin ally formed t h eresolution of adoptin g that city as h is hom e ; an d from a

Frenchm an , as h e h ad origin ally been , h e determin ed t obecom e an Areti n e .

At a later period, con siderin g withi n himself that t h ear t of pai n ti n g on glass could n ot secure a lon g durationto t h e works of those who att ach them selves thereto ; an dseein g that they ar e perpetually liable to dest ruction

,

Guglielmo conce ived t h e desire of devotin g him self topain tin g ge n erally , an d accordin gly accepted a commission from t h e superin te n de n ts of t h e church of Arezzo ,for t h e decoration ,

i n fresco , of three very large vaultin gs ,these bein g labours i n which h e hoped to leave an

e n durin g mem orial of h i s existe n ce . When these workswere fin ished , t h e people of Arezzo presen ted t h e m asterwith a sm all estat e , which h ad belon ged to t h e Con fr at er n i ty of S . Maria della Misericordia ; it was situatedn ear t h e town , an d was an adm irable si t e whereon t obuild houses. This, they desired , h e should en j oy for t h eremain der of h i s life . They further decreed , that t h ework

,on bein g finished , should b e estim ated by an

artist of distin ction , an d that t h e superin te n de n ts oft h e Cathedral should then m ake over to Guglielmo t h efull sum thus awarded .

‘ In this work t h e Prior was

l Marcillat pa in ted t wo of these histor ies i n May, 1 52 4, an d RidolfoGhir lan daj o valued them a t four hun dred ducats . On t h e lot h of October,1 5 2 6

,h e un dertook t h e pain ti n g of t h e six vaults ; i . e.

,th e sm all on es wh ich

a r e n o t pa i n ted—they were to have bee n pain ted on a gold gr oun d

an d decorated w ith various orn am en ts,an d h e was to have r eceived

for t h e work seven ty ducats, a t seven lire per ducat. Gaye Cart eggio.


which i s , even n ow,in a very perfect state . He also

pain ted t h e great win dow of t h e Dom in ican church , an dhere h e h as represen ted a vin e , which , sprin gin g out ofS . Dom in ic , exhibits, on i t s bran ches , all t h e saints ofthat In stitute ; on i t s sum m it i s t h e B . V. M. , an d our

Lord espousin g S . Catherin e of Sien a . For this work ,which was highly lauded , h e would rece ive n o m on ey ,as h e was un der m an y ob liga t ion s t o t h e Pr each i n g

-Fri a r s .

It no lon ger exists . He likewise pain ted som e w in dowsfor t h e church of t h e Madonn a delle Lagrim e (of t h eTears) ; an d , also , for t h e ch ur ch of S . Jer om an d of S .

Rocco . From Ar e zzo h e sen t a win dow to Floren ce ,which was pain ted for t h e church of San ta Felicita, i n thatcity ;1 another to Castiglion delLago , an d two or three toPe rugia. An d as h e took great delight i n architecture

,

h e m ade m an y design s of public an d private bu ildin gsfor t h e citizen s of Ar ezzo ; h e , also , execu ted t h e ston ew ork of t h e two doors of t h e chur ch of San Rocco , an d

t h e beautifully elaborat ed orn am en tation (in ston e) thatwas placed roun d Luca Sign orelli’s pai n tin g i n t h e churchof S . Jer om . He also executed on e for t h e con fr atern ityo f t h e Trin ity, i n t h e chape l of t h e Crucifixion ; togetherw ith an exquisite lavatory for t h e Sacristy . Delightin gin labour ,

” con tinues Vasari , an d occupyin g him selfcon tin ually , win ter an d summ er , with m ural pain tin gs , a

practi ce calculated to ren der t h e m ost robust unhealthy ,Guglielm o suffered greatly from t h e hu m idity am idstwhich h e w orked ; disease e n sued , for which h e was

treated by physician s ; but unable to e n dur e t h e operationt o which they subm itted h im , h e san k beneath h i s

1 \Vhen this wi n dow reached Floren ce, t h e Gesuati , wh o were great cultivat or s of this ar t , decom posed i t , i n order to learn t h e m ethod em ployed byFr a Gugli elm o.


suff erings, aft er a few days’ illness, resign in g h i s soul in to

t h e han ds of Him w h o h ad given it ; first receivin g t h esacram en ts of t h e Church , as b efi t t ed a good Christian ,an d makin g h i s will . En tertain i n g a particular ven eration for t h e Erem ite mon ks of Cam aldoli

,who have their

abode on t h e sum mit of t h e Apen n in es , at t h e distan ceof twen ty miles from Arezzo , or thereabout ; to them itwas that t h e Prior Guglielm o left h i s property an d h i s

body. Hi s glasses , im plem en ts of labour , an d drawin gs ,h e left to h i s disciple , Pastorin o , of Sien a, who h ad beenwith h i m man y years .

”1 Th e Prior died in 1 5 3 7 , agedsixty-two years. Th e life of h i s disciple , Pastorin o ,m ay b e read i n Baldi n ucci .2 His other pupils wereMaso Porro , of Corto n a ; Battista Borro , of Arezzo ;an d am on gst those to whom h e taught drawi n g an d

colourin g, were Ben edetto Spadar i , an d t h e biographer ,Vasari .We will not add to t h e en com ium s which t h e latter

h as bestowed on this em i n en t artist, b u t will conten tourselves with poin tin g to t h e beautiful win dows i n t h ecathedral ofArezzo , which , i n our judgm en t, ar e at onceh i s glory an d h i s eulogium .

With h i m we close t h e seri es of t h e Dom in ican glasspain ters. In t h e fourteen th cen tury our friars were t h ezealous cultivators of this ar t ; an d every on e will admit ,

Bot t on io thin ks that t h e win dow for t h e Dom i n ican church m ust havebeen pai n ted about 1 52 5 an d h e adds He also pai n ted t h e Rose wi ndow for t h e cathedral of Perugia ; an d to h im also i s attr ibuted t h e wi n dowof t h e chapel of t h e Rosary i n our Church.” That of t h e cathedral wasdestr oyed i n t h e past cen tury ; that of t h e Dom in i can s n o lon ger exists.Father Boar i n i rem em bers a wi n dow by Marcillat, in t h e chapel of SanLoren zo, i n t h e church of San Dom en ico at Perugia .

—V. Descr iz . dellaChiesa di San Dom en ico, p. 45 an d Mr s. Foster’s Tran s. of Vasari .

9 V. Notizie dei Professori delDisegn o. v. 5 .

1 96 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERS

that i ts glory culm in ated with Fr a Guglielm o diMar cillat .

l

CHAPTER XII .

Fr a Paoli n o da Pis toja, di sciple of Fra Bartolom m eo della Por ts .

PISTOJA , a city ren owned i n letters an d arm s, fam edcom m erce , an d blessed by Providen ce with nature’schoicest gifts , balm y ai r , fertile soil

,an d a m ellifluous

idiom , cannot pride itse lf on havin g produced manycelebrated artists ; for of all t h e Italian cities this sufferedmost from intern ecine hates an d rivalries.

“ I t s history,

”

says Con t rucci , “ i s a horrid picture of bloodshed,

con flicts , carnage t h e m ost barbarous, devastat ion , an d

ruins.

2 There i s no heart, so hard , that will n ot weep

Th e best works on glass-pain tin g are t h e followi n g - Gessert d ie Glasm aler ei i n Fran kreich ; Le Veil, Ar t de la Pein ture Sur verre Last cyr ie,

Hi stoire de la Pein ture sur verre ; Mr s . Mer r ifield’

s Tr an s. of an an cien tMS . See also an ad m irable chapter on th i s ar t by t h e lear n ed par ish pr ies tOudi n , i n t h e Archeologie Ch ret ien n e, (Bruxelles, a work that shouldb e fam il iar to every priest. Th e oldest docum en t extan t, relatin g to glasspain tin g

,is a letter written by t h e Abbot Gosb er t de Teuger see, i n Bavaria.

I t was com posed between 983 an d 1 001 . Th e best specim en of t h e ar t

which Irelan d possessed, was t h e wi n dow of S. Can i ce’s cathedral, Kilken n y,which a barbarian n am ed Ax t le suffered h is soldiers to sm ash, when Cr om wellgot possessi on of t h e city. We ar e glad to learn that t h e Rt . Rev. Dr . Foran ,Bishop of Waterford, h as recen tly decorated h i s cathedral with a very beauti ful wi n dow ,

pain t ed by Mr . Hardm an , of Birm in gham . This gen tlem an

i s en titled to our h ighes t praise for h i s successful efforts to r evive this gran d,old ar t .

2 For a splen did picture of these feuds an d faction s, see Dr . M iley’s Hist.of t h e Papal States,” which we rejoice to say h as been tran slated in to Fren ch .

See also Con t rucci , Op.. E dite ed In ed. Pis t oja, 1 84 1 .


been able to ascertain , as t h e conven tual Chron icles of

Prato an d Pi s t oja have been lost ; but aft er searchin g t h eIn vestm en t Books of Fi esole , an d these of San Marco i nFloren ce , an d n ot findin g h i s nam e , I have con cludedthat h e , like Port a, m ust have passed h i s novitiate in t h econ vent of San Domen ico

, at Prato . Th e superiors,seein g that t h e youn g Pi st ojese possessed great artistictalen t , determined to place h im un der Fr a Bartolom m eodella Porta, that h e m ight learn t h e ar t of pain tin g fromh im ; for they were an xious to keep alive in the ircloisters that holy flam e , which from t h e earliestm om e n t of their existen ce , was fon dly cherished by t h eDom in ican s. Wherefore

,havi ng aban doned t h e study

of divi nity, for which h e h ad n ot m uch aptitude , Fr aPaolin o

,if Razzi b e correctly in form ed , se t ou t for

Floren ce , AD 1 503 , i n t h e thirteenth year of h i s age .

Thus, it i s possible , that h e m ay have availed him se lf oft h e exam ples of t h e m ost distin gui shed pain ters of t h eFlorenti n e school , an d form ed t h e acquaintan ce of t h eother painters, sculptors, an d architects , w ith whomt h e modern Athen s then abounded . I have alreadysaid that Fr a Bartolom m eo caused him to m odel i nclay— n ay, that h e was , probably , assist ed i n this pr eparatory exercise by Fr a Am brogio della Robbia, whowas exce llent in this ar t , as i s proved by such worksof h is as rem ain in Sien a.

1 I con sider that drawingought to b e associated with modellin g, if an artist i sdesirous t o becom e an excellen t pain ter , an d it m ayn ot b e amiss to stat e that t h e latt er was m uch m orefam iliar to t h e an cien t s than it i s to t h e m odem s .

In t h e fir st volum e of these Mem oirs, I placedFr a Am brogio della Robbiaam on gst those whom Savon arola in fluen ced to take t h e Dom in ican habit ;th is, however, was a sim ple con jectur e. But I am deli ghted to fi n d thatt h is n ephew of Lucca della Robbia, h as left a beautiful specim en of h is

SCULPTORS , AND ARCHITEC T S . 99

Th e first essay that Fr a Paolin o m ade of it i s dated1 5 1 3 ; at which pe riod h e w as requested by h i s con

freres t o m odel t wo large statues which were destin edfor t h e li ttle church of S. Mary Magdalen e , i n Piandi Mugn on e . Fr a Bartolom m eo

,probably , furn ished

t h e design of t h e figures , which were half t h e life size .

Paolin o , therefore , produced a S . Domin ic , an d a S .

Mary Magdalen e , which i n chasten ess of design ,an d

beauty of t h e draperies, exh i bit t h e m anner of Porta .

S ign or acci coloured them i n 1 5 1 6 , at which periodthey w ere placed in t wo niches, on e ither side of t h egran d altar. 1

When Sign or acc i arr ived i n Flore n ce , t wo otherDom in ican s, Fr a An drea, an d Fr a Agostin o , weres tudyin g t h e ar t of pai n tin g

,under Fr a Bart olom meo

,

Plastic skill in t h e chur ch d elle Spirito San to,i n S ien a. In t h e archives of

t h e Dom in ican s, n ow i n t h e cathedral of S ien a, we read In t h e tim e ofBrother Robert Ub aldi n i , t h e an n al ist of San Marco. (MDI II I .) Th eMan gerof t h e Lord was m ade for t h e church ; it was executed by Fra Am brogio deRubia, whom t h e Prior an d Father s of t h e con ven t in vited hither for thatpurpose,” et c. This Man ger

,com posed of vitr ified terra ~ cotta, i s n ow in t h e

chapel of t h e Span i ards, which was pain ted i n fr esco by Razzi . In thisw ork there are four figures, n ot coun tin g t h e In fan t, lif e size ; there ar e alsot h e two an im als between which t h e Saviour was born . Th e head of S.

Joseph i s beautifully m odelled. Th e figure of t h e shepherd i s m ediocr e, b utthat of t h e Virgin an d on e of t h e shepherds (perhaps by an other han d) m ay

b e said to b e i n fer ior.In t h e Credi t an d Debit book of t h e Hospice of S . Mary Magdalen e, i n

P ian Mugn on e,we fi n d t h e follow in g m e m oran da Jun e 1 7 , 1 5 1 6 , Marco

di S ilvestro an d Tom m aso Giachi executed t h e plaster-work over t h eMan ger. 1 9 t h of said m on th

,t h e clay figures m ad e by li t t le Paul,

of Pis toja, (then a m ere youth) were se t up i n their places ; though n otbaked, they are still very hard , for h e m ade them three years before, an d byh im they were pain ted t o t h e hon our of God, S . Dam , an d S. Magdalen e.

”

Un der date, July 1 2 , 1 5 1 6, we fi n d, that h e h ad fin ished t h e pai n tin g ofthem , an d that they were secured w ith w ires to preven t them falli n g.” Thesem em oirs further in form us that t h e figures for t h e Manger were executedby An drea della Robbia, Fr a Am brogio’s father.


Of t h e first of these , nothin g h as survived , an d i t

would appear that h e assisted Fr a Bar tol. in works of

minor im portan ce . Th e secon d associat ed himse lf withFr a Paolino—n ay, sought to outshine h im

, but h en ever attai ned to m ore than mediocrity .

‘ We haveseen that Fr a Bartol . se t out for Rom e in t h e sprin gof t h e year 1 5 1 4 , to behold t h e works of Raffaello an d

Michelan giolo . On h i s return to Flore n ce , h i s stateof health compelled h im to go t o t h e Dom in icanHospice i n Pian di Mugnon e . Th e mem oirs of thatplace record that h e brought two disciples alon g withh im

, an d that they there pain ted some histories of

t h e Holy Fathers . Although t h e n am es of these two

b e not men tion ed , we th ink it very likely that theywere Fr a Paolino an d Fr a Agostino . Th e pictures oft h e Holy Fathers which they painted , an d which m ay

have been designed by Fr a Bartol . no lon ger exist .In a cell , however , of t h e upper dormitory , there i s

a fresco, much injured by re touchin g , which representsS . Thom as of Aqui no , in t h e act of praying . Thi sfigure is w ell preserved. Th e man ner i s that of Fr aBartol . an d as t h e design i s very feeble , I regar d itas t h e work of h i s di sciples .

Nature di d not give Sign or acci extraordin ary gen ius ,an d I look on h im as rather poor in inven tion than

Chr on . Con v. S. Spiritus de Sen is, A.D . MD II. “When Sacram oro ofRim in i, was Pri or of this con ven t t h e lay

-brothers Agost i n o an dAn dr ea, Floren ti n e pain ters, were sen t for to decorate t h e n ew church. Bytheir ar t an d pious labour, t h e walls of t h e chur ch were pain ted." I t is n eces

sary t o rem ark, that t wo Dom i n ican pai n ters called Agostin o, are recordedi n t h e chr on icles of t h e Order. On e of them i s Agostin o di Paolo delMugello

,

wh o was afii lia ted to t h e con ven t of San Marco. Th e ot h er is design atedAgostin o di Paolo di Mar co Maccon i

, or de’Maccon i, of Pistoja , wh o, havi n g

been a secular pain ter , was received in to t h e com m un ity at Fiesole, i n 1 499.

I thin k it was t h e first of these wh o ass isted Fr a Paolin o, in S ien a.

2 02 MEMOIRS OF’

EMINENT PAINTERS ,

geli st at e ither side ; an d at i t s foot , kn eelin g, S . M .

Magdalene , an d S . Catherin e of Sien a,all which figures

ar e life-size . I w on ’t call this a perfect picture ; n ever t h eless , there ar e portion s of it well executed , as for example ,t h e figure of t h e B . V . , an d that of S . Catherin e . Th e

nude of t h e Christ, whose m em bers ar e som ewhatexaggerated , does n ot exhibit much study of an atom y ,an d t h e j oin ts of t h e extrem ities eviden ce that feeblen esso f design which characterises t h e rest of Sign or acci

’

s

works . Th e tin tin g , however , an d t h e gracefulness oft h e draperies, ar e highly com m en dable . I cann ot say so

m uch for t h e figure of S . John,which i s in ferior i n

pen cillin g to t h e others ; th i s was , probably , t h e work of

Fr a Agostin o . For a lon g tim e this work was unive rsally attribut ed to Fr a Bartolom m eo , an d this fact reflectscredit on h i s disciple ; but t h e brothers Milan esi , bothdiligen t i n vestigators of their coun try’s history, veryre cen tly discovered t h e nam es of t h e two pain ters i n a

b ook of mem oran da pertain in g to t h e aforesaid Ar chives .

‘

Havin g returned to Floren ce , Fr a Paolin o , in t h e year

1 “A .D. MDXVI. John Ridolfi n i da Narn i, gave i n ai m s for h is brother, th irtyfi ve lire. This brother was Master Cherubin o, wh o, when h e was about toreceive h i s Doctoral degr ee i n ar t an d m edicin e, died at S ien a, an d chosethi s con ven t for h i s bur ial—place. John con sen ted that this m on ey should b ee xpen ded on a pain tin g of t h e Crucifixion , w ith four figures at t h e sides .

He wh o pain ted it was Fr a Paolo da Pi st oja, an d h e was assisted by t h e laybrother, Agosti n o. Un der this Crucifixion they bur ied t h e body of MasterCherubin o. This Crucifixion should have cost m uch m ore i f i t h ad n ot beenexec uted by our friars. John did n ot expen d m uch m on ey on it, b ut h egave som e vestm en t s to t h e con ven t to prove h i s gratitude to Fr a Paolo an dAgost in o. They pai n ted i t i n Septem . an d Oct ob .

,

Th e i n scription on t h e tom b i s t h e follow i n gSen a vetus Cherubin

Gen ui t quem Nar n ia Gen t isC lara Rodolph i n e,Febre t apit clari o


follow in g, was.

bitterly affl icted by t h e death of h i s

m aster who , as we have already said, departed this lifei n October, 1 5 1 7 This w as a great loss to Sign or acci ,for I hold it to b e in dubitable , that if h e h ad been ableto avail h im se lf for a lon ger period of t h e examples an dprecepts of Fr a Bartolom meo , h e m ust have trium phedover that feeblen ess of design which characterises all h i ssubsequen t works .

‘ Havin g got possession of all Porta’scartoon s an d design s, h e w as en abled by m ean s of them ,

t o execute very m an y pain tin gs . At thi s period h e se t

about com pletin g som e pictures that h i s master h ad lefte ither on ly design ed , or un fin ished . Am on gst these w as

t h e Deposition from t h e Cross,n ow i n t h e Flore n tin e

Gallery, m arked No . 48 . Up to a very recen t period itw as thought to have been by Fr a Bartol . , but t h eMem oirs of t h e Hospice of S . M. Magdalen e , clearlyprove that it was on ly out-lin ed by Porta, an d coloured ,after h i s death , by Fr a Paolin o . It was placed over t h e

grand altar of that church , July 2 lst , Thispain tin g represen ts t h e Virgin pressin g t h e lifeless formof h e r Son to h er bosom ; on h er right i s S . John t h e

Evan gelist ; on h er left S . M . Magdalen e together withS . Dom in ic , an d S . Thom as of Aqui n o ; (t h e latt e rfigures ar e a f uor d

’

oper a .) I kn ow not whether itshould b e attributed to t h e wastin g han d of tim e , or to

l Th e Chron . of t h e Con v. of S. Dom . di Pi st oja, written by F. Razzi ,states

,that Fr a Paolin o studied i n S. Marco, un der Fr a Bartol . della Por t s ,

for fourteen year s . This can n ot b e, for it would lead us to beli eve that FraPaolo took t h e habit when on ly twelve years old.

Cr edit an d Debit Book of t h e Hospice of S. Magdal. i n Plan di Mugn on e.

On t h e vigil of S . M. Magd. ( 1 5 1 9) a picture design ed by Fr a Bartol. wasplaced over t h e altar of our church. As death preven ted Fr a Bartol. fromfi n i shin g it, it was coloured by Fr a Paolo da Pi st oja. I t con tain s t h e followi n g figures — t h e Virgin w ith h er on ly Son (dead) , an d S . John , an d M.

Magdalen e, together with S. Dom in i c an d S. Thorn . of Aquin o.”

204 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERS,

retouchin g , b ut it i s certain that t h e colouring of thispicture i s very feeble ; n or can it b e classed among t h ebest thin gs designed by Porta, an d fin ished by Sign or acci .In said church there i s now a beautiful copy of it , whichdimin ishes our regret for t h e absen ce of t h e original .I do not kn ow whether it was durin g h i s master’s lifetime , or aft er h i s death , that Fr a Paolin o coloured t h e

large an d beau t iful picture of t h e Assum ption , whi ch t h eDom in ican s still retain i n S . Maria del Sasso , nearBibbien a. It i s gen erally thought that Fr a Bartol .painted t h e upper half of this work , an d Fr a Paolin o t h eother—xi . e.

, t h e un der half ; but docum ents discoveredby Vincen zo Fin eschi , leave no doubt that it was on lydesign ed by Porta, an d that it was entirely coloured byh i s disciple .

‘ Havin g seen many works by t h e Pi st ojese ,an d

, also , t h e picture of S . Paul , which h e executed i nh i s own coun try , I m ust con fess, that n on e of h i s

pain tin gs possesses more beauty of tinting, or delicacy of

colourin g , than does this of t h e Assum ption . Fi n esch iattributes to S ign or acci t h e picture S . Vin cen t Ferrer ,which i s now in t h e same church , though it was , for along time , supposed to b e t h e work of Porta ; but wecan claim , w ithout an y doubt, for Fr a Paolino , t h e

paintin g over t h e altar of S . Lucia , i n t h e lower churchdel Sasso ; this represents t h e Virgi n , with t h e In fan t i nh er arms, S . Lucia kn eelin g , an d som e Domi n ican Saints,who , accordin g to Fin eschi , ar e por trai ts of t h e re ligi ousof that conven t . Th e painter h as here traced h i s initials ,an d t h e year MDXXV.

2 Bearing t h e sam e date , wasan other picture , now lost, which t h e same pain ter

l Com pen d. S t or. Crit. Sopra 2 Im m agin i di S. Maria n ella Chi esa di S.M. del Sasso presso Bibbien a.

2 F. P. O. P. (Frat. Paulus. O rdi n is. Praadica t ).

206 MEn or n s or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

atrocit ies of Charles V . ,than it did from Attila’s

barbarians ; but, as for Florence , it was a pitiablespectacle to see it, rui n ed by those who should have beent h e truest defenders of i t s liberty an d glories. Th e

Medici,nowise corrected by exile , n ever sym pathised

with their native soil in i t s terrible sufferin gs ; an d thoughthr ice driven across i t s fron tier , they returned as oft en witharms in the ir han ds to ens lave an d degrade it . Thus wast h e fair city of t h e Arn o ultim at ely doom ed t o fall in tot h e hands of t h e in fam ous Alexander. After a lon g an d

bloody siege , it presen ted a scen e of woe an d desolationun preceden ted sin ce t h e days of Nero . When we

remember that t h e counsellor an d sycophant of t hismon st er (Duke Alexan der) was this very Gui ccardi n i ,whose blood con gealed while h e was depictin g t h e

atrocities of Duke Valen tino , we ar e con strain ed to askourselves what we ought to thin k of this “ Father ofItalian History 1” It i s pr obable that Fr a Paolin o di dn ot chose to b e a spectator of these dreadful disaste rs , forwe do n ot fi n d h i m in Florence at this period , butwanderin g from place t o place , an d finally return in g t ot h e soil of h i s nativity, aft er man y peregrin ation s.

Itwould appear that h e visit ed Vi t erbo , as t h e chroniclesof t h e con ven t of S . Maria de lla Quercia, (at that tim ebelongin g to t h e Con gregat ion of Tuscan y

,) inform us,

that h e com pleted a picture whi ch Porta h ad lef tunfin ished , either when h e was goin g t o Rome orreturni n g then ce . We pray t h e reader to recall whatwe have said an en t this, i n Porta

’

s life an d we willhere subj oin t h e origi nal n otice , taken fi om t h e chron iclesof that con ven tA . D . 1 543 , when F . Thom . Buon i n segn i was Prior ,

See Book i ii . chap. vi. of this vol.


t h e paintin g an d figure of our Lady was placed, where itn ow actually i s , an d t h e pain ter was Father Fr a Paoli n oda Pi st oja , of our Order , an d h e rece ived , by way of

paym en t , 45 gold crown s ; although , it i s said , that t h edesign was furn ished by Fr a Bartol . , who also was a laybrother of our order an d -that this pictur e m ay b e moredis tin ctly kn own , we will men tion ,

that on i t s sum m it, ina medallion ,

i s pain ted God t h e Father i n t h e act of

blessin g. He i s surrounded by An gels . In t h e un derpar t of t h e picture i s a m ost beautiful Virgin

,who kn eels,

an d i s crow n ed by t h e Lord , who i s en circled by man yan gels ; un der, these ar e all our sai n ts kn eelin g , togetherwith m an y other sain ts . This i s deem ed a very beautifulwork , by those who ar e skilled i n t h e ar t , an d it i s kn ownthat it was executed by Fr a Bartol .” Th e fr iars of thiscon ven t, n ot satisfied with havin g en gaged Sign or acci toperfect this picture , charged h im with t h e execution ofan other of h i s own in ven tion . It i s men tioned i n t h e

chron icles thus Th e chape l that i s under that ofVal di Marco , of which Caprin o di Mon t

’

alto i s patron ,

was pain ted by Fr a Paolin o da Pi st oja, an d h e was

com mission ed to execut e t h e work by said Caprin o,

who thus expressed h i s gratitude for a favour which h eh ad received from t h e Madon n a . Th e chapel i s called ,Della Pieta.

”2 These words do n ot explain whether h efr escod t h e chapel , or pain ted a picture on can vas or

panel . Certain it i s , however , that that church possesses

This i s plai n ly a m istake of t h e Chr on icler,for Fr a Bartol. an d Fr a

Paol in o were n ot lay-brothers, b ut Deacon s .

2 Li b . delle C h r on i eh e della Chiesa del Con v. della Quercia, M. S. Th e

pain tin g m en tion ed by t h e chron icle i s that which i s n ow over t h e altar oft h e choir. As w ell as I rem em ber

,it resem bles i n beauty of colour i n g t h e

Assum ption that is in S. M. del Sasso i n Bibbien a.


on ly t h e picture in t h e choir, which was outlin ed byPorta , an d coloured by Fr a Paoli no .

Havin g com ple ted these works, it appears thatSign or acci return ed to h i s native place , where h e

executed many pictures that still exist. Having h adample Opportunity for examini n g them , i n 1 844, we ar e

t h e better en abled to describe them .

In t h e church of S . Domini c there i s now a pictu re ,which h as been removed from t h e sacristy int o t h e choir .

‘

Th e conception of this work resem bles that of t h e

splen did picture which Fr a Bartolomm eo painted for t h echurch of San Marco

,an d which i s now in t h e Palatine

Gallery . Like t h e former , t h e Virgin i s here represen te dseated on a th r on e , pressing to h er bosom t h e nudeIn fan t, who , with childish gracefuln ess, espouses S .

Catherin e , of Sien a : an d this Sain t i s depicted as a verybeautiful m aiden . It i s very little in ferior to t h e figur eof S . M . Magdalen e , whom h e represen ts kneeli n g on t h eopposit e Side . Surroun din g t h e Virgin , ar e sain tsAppollon ia, Dom i nic , Peter M. , an d Cecily. Althought h e composition of this picture i s n o t en tire ly origin al ,n eve rtheless t h e figures ar e well grouped , an d t h e design i scorrect, though t h e colourin g h as sustain ed som e in j ury .

2

Much more worthy of observation ,i s an Adoration of t h e

Magi , which i s i n t h e chapel of t h e m ost Holy Sacramen t ,near t h e grand altar, in t h e same church ; this i s, i n everyrespect, an origin al pain ting , an d deserves to b e classedamong Sign or acci

’

s best producti on s. Tolom ei , w h o saw

It is said that this was executed for t h e m on astery of S . Catheri n e, an dthat i t was rem oved then ce to t h e church of S . Dom en ico.

3 Razzi wri t es that Fr a Paolin o pain ted three pictures for h is chur ch ofS . Dom .

—V. S t or. degli Uom in i lllustri. I t is probable that th e third i sthat which (in t h e sam e chur ch) represen ts a Crucifixion wi th t h e Vir gi nan d S. Thom . of Aq. Thi s work h as been greatly in jured by tim e an d

retouchin g.


i n my judgmen t, bett er than that of an y ofFr a Paoli n o's

other works. Th e colouri n g i s harmon ious, although t h eChiaroscuro b e somewhat defective ; t h e extrem ities ar e

well outlin ed , an d t h e heads ar e more vivacious thanthese in h i s other pain tin gs . Neve rtheless , there i s a

dryness i n t h e outlin es, an d a con siderable amoun t ofharshn ess in t h e folds of t h e draperies . This latt er defecti s sin gularly visible i n this in stan ce .

But t h e best of Fr a Paoli n o’s works i s t h e gran dpain tin g n ow i n t h e chur ch of San Paolo , at Pi st oja,which m ay b e regarded as h i s ch ef d ’wuvr e. Here ,more than elsewhere , h e shows him self to have been a

follower an d im itator of Fr a Bartolom m eo de lla Por t a ;an d if, aft er see in g t h e other pain tin gs that h e producedfor oratories an d churches , i n h i s ow n coun try , we b efrequently disposed to pron oun ce h im m ediocre , thiswork , in t h e church of San Paolo , an d t h e Adoration of o

t h e Magi , must en title h im to a distin guished placeam on g t h e best artists of t h e sixteen th cen tury .

Th e con ception of this work i s not altogether origin al ,but bears a stron g resem blance to that en larged style of

com position which was so much appreciated by Fr aBartolommeo . He h as here represen ted t wo littleAn gels, (undraped ,) supportin g t h e han gi n gs of a

canopy, un der which t h e Virgin i s e n thron ed as“ Quee n

of Heaven .

”Her m ien i s m ajestic , h e r coun ten an ce i s

radian t with mat ernal affection , an d sh e holds t h e n udeIn fan t on h er kn ees. At foot of t h e thron e h e placedfour holy wom en ; two on t h e st ep

,an d t wo on t h e

groun d . They ar e S . Catherin e , V. an d M.

,S . Apollon ia ,

S . M . Magdalen e , an d S . Agnes, V. an d M . Aroundt h e thron e h e arran ged , sym me trically, a choir of holym en . On t h e Virgin ’

s right ar e S . Paul , S . John , (B)


S . Domin ic , an d a figu re , of which we see on ly t h e

profile : t h e latter i s thought to b e a portrait of Saven ar ola— a tribute of hom age , perhaps, to t h e virtues an dt h e sufferin gs of this great m an . On t h e left h e pain tedS . Peter, S . Jam es, S . Loren zo , S . An t on i n o , an d anotherSain t whom w e ar e n ot able to dete rm in e . At foot oft h e thron e , an d seated on i t s step , i s a little An gel ,playin g a lute , much i n t h e style of Porta

’

s composition s .

I grieve to say that h e h as here depicted t h e twoprin cipal figur es, (t h e Apostles Peter an d Paul ,) as itwere turn in g the ir backs on t h e Virgin , as though theywere regardless of h er august presen ce . This i s a

grave error , as it dim i n ishes that unity wh i ch shouldpervade a picture just as much as a dram atic com posi t ion . Th e whole work i s fin ished i n t h e e n largedstyle ; an d we can n ot but ad m ire t h e m an agem en t ofli ght an d shadows, as well as t h e perspective , whichi s really adm irable . In t h e expression of t h e headsh e i s very variable , an d i n that of t h e Virginan d h er Son , we perce ive t h e gracefulness of Raff aello

,

but as to t h e others, h e m ight have in fused m ore lifeinto them . Th e draperies , too , ar e here an d there som e

what dry an d harsh . But that which presen ts t h e mostgrateful illusion to t h e eye , i s t h e Shadin g of t h e superfi ci es on which t h e perspective lin es ar e adm irably drawn .

N0 on e can con tem plate this picture without fee lin ghim se lf im pressed with reveren ce i n presen ce of sucha solemn scen e ! Were on e to b e hypercritical , h e m ightfind fault with t h e an gel playin g t h e lut e , whose attitudei s not n atural ; an d w ith t h e han ds of S . Loren zo , whichar e defective i n proportion s ; but still m ore so w ith t h ehan d of S . Peter , who holds a book , for , in deed , thishan d seem s as though it were broken . Despite theseblemishes, an d t h e absence of origin ality , this picture , i n

2 1 2 MEMOIRS . or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

i t s ensemble , reflects hon our on t h e pain ter an d on t h eland of h i s birth .

‘

Th e works we have enumerated, were quite enoughfor Fr a Paoli n o

’

s glory ; an d a more copious account ofthem m ay b e foun d i n Tolom ei .2 About four years agoa fresco , coated over with whitewash , was di scovered i nt h e refectory of t h e conven t of S . Dom en ico i n Pi st oja .

It represen t ed som e passages i n t h e life of S . Domin ic ,which Repe t t i e rron eously asserted to b e a Supper of

t h e Apostles , habite d as Domin icans. It was thought t ohave been t h e work ofFr a Paolin o ; but as itwas in feriort o h i s other works, it was on ce m ore buried under liquidlime .

3

From all we have said , I thin k , it clearly follows thatour pain ter was som ewhat feeble in design , (particularlyof t h e nude ,) an d not very fertile in in ven tion , thoughbrillian t an d vigorous i n colourin g . In lin ear perspectiveh e was secon d to none ; n or can it b e den ied that h e wassufficiently versed i n t h e treatment of t h e r eal. In h i s

dr apar i es h e was a close imitator of Porta ; an d h i s

Virgin s, by far excel these of t h e latter i n devoutn essn ay, an d in celestial beauty . He adopted a variety of

1 On t h e st ep of t h e thron e we read : Opus F. Pauli . de Pist. Or . Pr :ed. ,MDXXVII.” This pain ti n g was executed for t h e con ven t of S . Dom . i n

Pi stoja ; b ut n ot bein g suited t o t h e place for wh ich i t was desti n ed, it wassold to t h e Prioral Church of San Paolo. A few years ago t h e gover n m en tordered i t to b e r estored.

2 Th e Gui de. di Pist oja m en tion s m an y other pictures by Fra Paolin o ; b utt h e i n correctn ess of their design , espec ially i n t h e n ude, forbids us to recogn isethem as h i s.

3 We have om itted m en tion i n g a picture attributed to Fr a Paolo, whichis n ow i n t h e Flor. Academ y, for we deem i t to have been by an other han d.It represen ts an Assum ption , an d t h e Virgin i n t h e act of givin g h er cin cturet o S . Thom . t h e Apostle. It i s m arked No. 5 3 , an d i s said to have b elow r e d

to t h e suppressed m on astery di San Vi n cen zo d’An n alen a.

2 1 4 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTER S ,

fellow-citizen s, to atte st their appreciation of h i s rare ex

cellen ce , caused a bron ze medal to b e struck i n h i s

hon our ; an d Lan zr te lls us that h e saw it alon g withothers of t h e most illustrious den izen s of Pi st oja.

l

CHAPTER XII .

Fra Dam ian o da Bergam o, t h e celebrated In tar siator .—Hi s Works i n h i s

ow n Coun try, i n Bologn a, an d elsewhere —His D isciples.

A s w e proceed i n this work , we ar e cheered by a hopethat our efforts shall do more than m erely fill up t h e

lacun ae which ar e to b e foun d i n t h e History of Itali anArts . These cow led pain ters , sculptors , an d ar chi t ects ,who

,in t h e silence of t h e cloister, divided their time

between labour an d prayer ; who kept ali ve t h e sacredfi r e of Art, an d who , havin g left on earth suchsplen did m on um en ts of the ir in tellects an d hands , sanki n to graves which shroud the ir very n ames in m ys

t er i ous obscurity , have bequeathed a noble lesson notonly -to t h e FR IARs ; but also , to every other ar tist,who rightly estim ates t h e evan escen t pleasures of thislife , an d would fain seek im perishable glory i n t h e

bosom of Religion . It i s true that t h e An ge lico , Fr aBarto lomm eo , an d Sign or acci , rivalled t h e most emin en tartists of their age , but the ir chiefest merit i s that theyleft behind them worthy imitators an d copyists of theirv irtues . An d

, in deed , this age of ours , so turbulen t,

l H ist of Pai n ti n g. Flor. Sch ., 2 n d Epoch. This m edal

,executed by

Viton i , was afterwards sold, an d we have n ot discover ed t h e actual possessor.This 1 have on t h e author ity of Giuseppe Tigri of Pi s t oja, to whom I am

i n debted for var ious n otices of Fr a Paolin o.


vain ,an d frivolous, i s far m ore i n n eed of gran d exam ples

than of n ew theories. We ar e n ow about to speak of anartist, wh o , at a period, when everythi n g con spired todebase Italy , an d when craven -hearted traitors werefawnin g on t h e Stran ger who tram pled us un der h i sfeet, h ad t h e man lin ess— poor Friar as h e was— to giveCharles V . such a lesson , as m ust have surprised h i sCaesarean majesty . Th i s was that Fr a Dam ian o da Bergamo

,who excelled all h i s con tem poraries i n t h e ar t of

Tarsia ; an d who , even after t h e lapse of three cen turies,i s still i n possession of a glory which tim e h as n ot beenable to di m or di m in ish .

“

Of h im,therefore , we will

treat with all possible accur acy— fi r st prem isin g suchn otices as we deem opportune for t h e illustration of h i slife .

That sort of work , called I n t a r si a , an d kn own to t h ean cien ts , un der t h e gen eri c appellation of Opus Sectile ,

”

i s i n ti m ately iden tified with t h e ar t of con j oin in g piecesof m arble i n m osa ic. I have n o t

,however

,been able

to ascertain whether t h e an cien ts were fam iliar with whatw e term Tarsia. In tim es nearer to our own ,

thi sar t began to b e very much cultivated i n Italy

, at t h e

period when Brun ellesco was perfectin g perspective .

Benedetto da Maian o , t h e renown ed sculptor,took t h e

greatest delight in this sort of work, an d cultivated

it zealously , as m ay b e seen by t h e very beautifularm ories which h e execu ted for t h e sacristy of t h e Florentin e cathedral ; an d also by t h e doors of an apartm en t inPalazzo Vecchio , whereon h e wrought t h e portraits of t h eDante an d Petrarca , ou t of pieces of wood con j oin ed ;n ot to speak of t h e stupen dous work described by Vasari ,which t h e same artist brought to t h e court of MatthiasC or vi n us, Kin g ofHun gary ,

‘ But t h e Tuscan s , who were

V. Vasari’s Life of Mai an o.


devoted to far nobler an d m ore durable works,left

Tarsia to t h e Ven etian s, who brought it to t h e rarestpe rfection . Padua, Ven ice , Trevigi , an d Veron a , weredecorated with t h e most glorious specim en s of this ar t ,an d for these we ar e in debted , i n a great measure , tothr ee Olive tan mon ks , t h e most di sti nguished of whomwas Fr a Giovann i da Veron a . We wi ll here takeoccasion to record on e proof of h i s excellen ce i n thisbranch of ar t . Pope Juli us II . , desirin g t o decorat e t h eben ches an d doors of t h e Vatican Palace with tarsia,in vited Fr a Giovanni t o Rom e

, an d t h e court orderedRaffaello to furnish t h e design s of all these w orks, whichreflect so m uch honour on t h e Friar .‘ Any on e who h asseen t h e postergals in t h e choir of t h e cathedral of Siena,rem oved thi ther from t h e con ven t of Mon te Oli ve to ,can n ot fail t o recognize t h e rare excellence of this artist .In fact, every pe rfection that tarsia can attain , particularlyi n pe rspective , i s most clearly shown in t h e stalls of thi schoir. I might m en tion m any other Itali an artist s whoexecuted very beautiful works of tarsia in t h e choirs oft h e Chartreuses, of Pavia , an d Bologn a ; an d , likewise ,i n t h e church of S . Francis, at Assisi but particularlyi n t h e choir of t h e cathedral of Citta di Cas tello , t h etarsie of which ar e believed t o have been elaborated aftert h e designs of Raffaellin o dal Colle .

3 But as production sof this sort ar e alm ost in fin ite i n Italy, an d as we don ot wish to b e prolix , it m ay suffice t o state that all

those who cultivat ed t his beautiful style of sculpture ,

V. Th e Life of Rafi‘

aello.

2 Th e choir of S. Fran cesco di Ass is i is t h e work of Dom en ico In dovi n i dSan sever i n o, con cern in g whom see Am ico Ricci, Mem . degl i Artist

,dell

M. d’

An con a.

3 It was executed by var ious artists at var iousb per i ods . Man cin i Ist ruz .

Stor. Pitt. di C itta di Castello.


which exist in t h e church of S . Domenico in Bergamo,h e

rem arks Th e i n t ar siat ed ben ches of t h e prin cipal chapelwere executed by Fr aDam ian o of Bergamo , a Domin icanlay

-brother , who was t h e di sciple of Fr a Schieren ,in Ven ice . Th e designs were furni shed by Trozo diMon za , Bern ardo da Trevi , Br am an t i n o

, an d others ; an dthey ar e histories of t h e Old Test amen t in perspective ”

!

Hen ce , we in fer thatFr a Damian o was t h e disciple of anIllyrian Friar , probably aDomin ican ; an d that h e cam e toVen ice to learn this ar t ; unless we ar e t o suppose , thatthis Sclavon ian (Schi avon e) friar was so called , n ot becauseof h i s birth-place , but because of h i s family

'

s cognom en .

Th e earliest notices whi ch we have of Fr a Dam iano ,represen t h i m ,

n ot i n h i s own country , but in Bologn a,where this artist spen t t h e greater part of h i s life . We

find t h e followin g en try in an old book be lon ging to t h econvent of S . Dom inic , in t h e last-n amed city Ann .

1 5 1 8 , Brother Damian o da Bergamo , a m ost skilful m an

i n works of Tarsia— a lay-brothe r, was received into this

con ven t .” Th e date (1 5 1 8, which appears i n Tassi’ework) must b e a typographical error ; for i n April , 1 842 ,I myself di scovered an an cient volum e of t h e Counselsof t h at very convent, when I was collectin g m aterials forthi sMemoir, an d i n that volum e t h e followin g entry m e t

my eye October 2 4 , 1 52 8, Fr a Damiano da Bergamow as received as a member of t h e convent , by FatherS tefano da Bologna, t h e Pri or , after havin g obtainedfaculties from t h e Vicar of t h e Order , 850 . This is t h e

Morelli's work was published i n Bassan o i n 1 800. Tassi says that t h eon ly rem ai n s of Fr a Dam ian o n ow existin g i n Bergam o, ar e t h e little pictures ( i n tar si a) which adorn t h e stalls of t h e choir of t h e Dom in i can s. Theywer e rem oved from t h e old church of S . Stefan o i n 1 56 1 . They ar e in feriorto these which h e executed i n Bologn a—V. Tass i

’

s Vi te degli Ar ch i t et i ,Bergum .


Fr a Damiano who h as execut ed t h e benches of t h e choirso beautifully, t hat they ar e t h e wonder of t h e world .

”1

Hen ce , we m ay reasonably con clude , t hat t h e Dom in icans,desirin g to adorn their church in Bologna, with traceriesan d tarsie , invit ed the ir con frere thi ther , an d affiliated h i mto that convent, in order to secure h i s affections for it.Indeed, t h e year of h i s affiliation correspon ds with t hat i nwh i ch h e commenced these works ; an d we m ay easilyform a not ion of t h e h i gh esteem in which h i s brethrenheld Fr a Dam ian o , from t h e fact of their preferr in g h i mt o another Domin ican In t ar si at or , n am edAnton i o Asinelli ,who , about 1 520, assisted Paolo Sacco da Crem a, at t h e

works i n t h e choir of S . Giovan n i al Mon te .

We have not been able to determine precisely at whatperiod our artist came to Bologna, but h e was certainlythere i n 1 52 7 , or, perhaps , somewhat earlier. Th e

works in t h e n ew choir were not begun t ill 1 52 8 ; an d ,before en gaging h i m at them , t h e religious requestedh i m to give them a sample of h i s handicraft . This essaywas to b e made on seven stalls, wh i ch were to b e fin i shed ,according to excellent design s, in t h e m ost exqui sitetracery ; an d others were to b e sim ilarly executed,provided h e acqui tt ed himself well i n t h e first . He ,

t herefore , designed t h e architect ur e of t h e same— that i st o say, t h e great cornices, an d t h e little pilasters , underwhich h e chiselled a double embasem en t. On t h e panelof t h e post ergals ,

2an d at foot of t h e ben ches, h e executed

fourteen his tori es, some great an d som e small, an d alsoseven heads of saints . On t h e first stall h e com posed t h eh is tory of a sain t, but whether it i s t hat of S . Petron ius ,Bishop of Bologna, or t hat of S . Niccolo’ di Barri , t h e

Li b . Con si l. S t i. Dom . Bon on iae, MS.,it com m en ces ad an n . 1 459 .

s It i s alm ost super fluous to tell t h e reader that t h e postergal is t h e backpart of t h e stall—post tergwn .


titular of that church , we have not been able to de te rmine . On t h e embasemen t h e represen ted

,in small

figures , t h e Sacrifice of Isaac , whi ch i s a most rare work .

Un der it , h e carved a head of S . John Baptist. In t h e

secon d stall h e executed a passage from t h e life of S .

Niccolo’ ; on i t s base , t h e Baptism of J . C . ; an d un der it ,a head of S . Dom in ic . On t h e third stall , h e represen tedt h e Stoning of S . Stephen ; on i t s b ase , Adam an d Eve

i n t h e terrestrial paradise ; an d on i t s lowest part , a heado f S . Peter . On t h e fourth , h e wrought t h e Conversionof S . Paul ; t ogether with an Adoration of t h e Magi ; an d

an Agn us Dei . On t h e fift h , h e represented Magdaleneat t h e feet of J . C i n t h e hall of t h e Pharisee ; t h e baseof this stall i s b eau t ified with an an gel expelling Adaman d Eve from paradise ; an d at i t s foot i s a head of S .

Pau l . On t h e sixth , h e represen ted t h e Martyrdom of S .

Catherine ; on i t s base , t h e Murder of S . Peter ofVeron a ; an d at foot of same stall , i s a head of a Saint .On t h e seven th stall , h e executed t h e Marriage feast ofCan a ; on t h e base , Moses receivin g t h e tables of t h e law ;an d at foot , t h e head of S . Alexan der.In these production s Fr a Dam ian o proved him se lf

such an excellen t carver , j oin er, an d painter of wood ,that h e far surpassed all h i s predecessors— n ay, an d all

those who have succeeded h im i n this ar t . Up to thatperiod all t h e ar t ificer s i n this style of work

,con tented

themselves with executin g perspectives, an d so j oin in gt h e pieces (of wood) , that they form ed profiles ; givin gt h e whole surface t h e appearance of a sin gle piece , thoughit was com posed of m an y . Moreover, i n all theirhistories they used on ly t wo colours , black an d white ;whereas , Fr a Dam iano discovered a m ethod of tin tin gt h e wood with various colours ; i n this particular far ex

cellin g even Fr a Giovanni da Mont e Olive to . Damiano ,

2 2 2 MEMOIR S or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

thereon , 1 52 8, which eviden tly denot es t h e pe riodwhen t h e car ver commenced t h e work . At foot of t h efirst stall , where h e carved t h e head of S . John , we fin d,

AD 1 5 3 0, t h e year i n which h e complet ed h is fir st essay ;t hat is to say, after six years of t oil . This i s still moredistinctly specified i n t h e last stall, at foot of which h eexecut ed an open book , bearing this inscripti on — “Thiswork was begun under t h e auspices of t h e R . F . StephenFuscar i , an d was comple ted On t h e

decoration s of on e of t h e pilasters , we find writt enFr a Damiano da Bergam o ;

”

an d on another, Fr aSt eph . Fos .

” On t h e base of another little pilaster i straced Tr e . K . cor on ab at ur (what t ime Charlest h e Em peror was crowned ”

) It was i n that very year ,that Pope Clem en t VII. placed t h e imperial

diadem on t h e head of Charles V. As this fact i sint imately connect ed with t h e history of our art ist, wemust say a few words an en t it.Th e aspect of Rome was tru ly piti able at t his period,for t h e Im perial troops h ad shed t h e blood of i t s i n h ab itant s , an d comm itted t h e m ost direful atrocities withini t s tem ples an d piazzas . Th e Pon tiff was thun derst ruckan d humiliated— all Italy was desolated by con tin uouswars— an d Bologn a h ad sus tained all t h e horrors of

famine .

‘ In t h e midst of all these t ribulations t h e

Emperor cam e to Bologn a t o b e crowned . PopeClemen t VII . preceded him , an d t h e monarch wasfollowed by a countless t rain of Italian an d German

I Th e Dom i n i can s brought all their church plate to t h e m in t, i n order tohave it turn ed i n to m on ey ; an d they adopt ed this course for t h e sake of t h epeople wh o wer e per ishi n g of hun ger. Som e of t h e coin s m in ted at t h e

peri od, still exist. They bear t h e arm s of t h e Order an d of Bologn a ; an dt h e followin g is t h e legen d : Ex collate aere de rebus sacr is e t pr oph an is

i n cegen or um subsidium MDXXIX,Bon on ia " On t h e reverse, Rei f ru

m en t ar ire cogen te in opia.

”


Prin ces ; n ay, t h e very soldiers who h ad sacked an ddesecrated t h e holy city, marched in t h e trium phan tprocession of t h e Emperor. On t h e 5 t h of Novembe r,1 52 9 , Charles V. presented him self to t h e Pon tiff ; an dit is said that when the ir eyes m e t , they both turn edpale . His Majesty then solem n ly proclaimed that h eh ad no part in t h e acts of Carlo di Bour bon

, an d thatt h e latter h ad outraged t h e Vicar of Christ, without h i scon sen t ; that h e h ad n ever san ction ed suchproceedi n gs , an d that t h e recollection of them causedhim t h e m ost poign an t pain . He then proclaim ed to t h ewhole un iverse t h e profound rever en ce that h e en tertainedfor t h e represen tative of Christ. It were hard to saywhether Pope Clem en t credi ted these protestations ; h ecertainly em braced t h e Em peror ; but there b e some whowrite that that em brace sealed t h e hapless destin ies of

t h e Flore n tin e Republic !Am id all this pom p an d festivity, t h e Pon tiff an d

Empe ror took special pleasure i n con tem platin g worksofArt ; for it then put forth all i t s m ost beautiful developm en t s t o solem nize this mem orable even t. Tizian oAlfon zo , Lom bardi , Bagnacavallo , Gi acom o , Fran cia ,an d that most capricious of pain ters, Am ico Asper t i n i ,

were then in Bologna. Th e Pope enqu ired for t h e

ce lebrat ed sculptress, Proper zi a de’ Rossi , an d h e was

t old (to h i s great chagrin) that sh e h ad died a few daysbefore . On t h e 5 t h of December, 1 52 9 , t h e Em perorvisited t h e shr in e of S. Dom in ic ; an d afte r havin g con

t em plated t h e ch efs d ’

oeuvr es which adorn t h e tem ple ofour holy Founder , h e paused to adm ire Fr a Dam ian o

’

s

traceries an d tarsie . He could n ot brin g him self t obelieve that these little histories an d heads were com posedof pieces of wood con j oin ed, an d to con vin ce him self, h eunsheathed h i s dagger an d chipped off a por tion of t h e

2 2 4 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS .

work . To commem orate t h e fact, these pieces haven ever been replaced .

‘ Such was h i s admirati on ofDamiano’s handicraft, that h e determined to visit him i nperson , aft er t h e cerem on y of t h e coron ation .

On t h e 7 t h of March , a n . 1 53 0, t h e Em peror , aecom

pan i ed by Alfon so d’

Este , Duke of Ferrara, an d somePrinces of h i s court, proceeded to t h e Dominicanconven t ; 2 an d haltin g before t h e hum ble cell of Fr aDamiano , knocked , an d dem an ded adm ittan ce . Th e

Friar open ed t h e door , an d j ust as t h e Em peror entered ,h e closed it quickly . Hold ,

”

said t h e Em peror, youhave shut out t h e Duke of Ferrara, who accompaniesm e .

”

I kn ew very well that i t was h e , replied t h e

lay-brother , an d i t i s because I know h im

,that I wi ll

n ot perm it h i m t o stan d under t h e vault of m y cell !”

“ Wh at ? ” asked Charles, “ have you reason to com plainof him ?” “Hear m e Sire ,

”

answered Fr a Damian o ;When I was com in g from Bergamo to Bologn a, i n orderto execute t h e works in t h e choir, I brought wi th m e

these few tools, which ar e absolutely necessary for t h epract ice of this ar t , i n t h e exercise of which I hope tospen d my life worthily. Well , I h ad scarcely se t footon t h e territory of Ferrara, when t h e officers of t h e

Duke com pelled m e— poor Friar as I am — to pay an

exorbitan t an d un jus t t ax ; but t h e ruden ess with whichthey treated m e , was still m ore intolerable ; an d this i st h e reason why t h e Duke of Ferrara shall never see t h eworks wh ich I now exhibit to your Majesty .

” Thisspiri t of in dependen ce was qui te novel to Charles, whowas con tinually surrounded by servile sycophan ts .

l Tassi, Vita di H a D.

2 Th e Pope an d t h e Em peror ass isted at Mass i n t h e chapel of S . Thom as

of Aquin o, whose feast was solem n ised on that day .


shrine of S . Domin ic , together with a pulpit for t h e

church .

” 1 This i s all that h e states ; but as it h as beenour good fort une t o light on t h e old books relatin g t o thi sconvent an d church , we ar e en abled to speak of Fr aDam iano’s works with far greater accuracy .

Thi s artist un dertook three com missions simultaneously.

An ar m ory for t h e chapel of S . Domen ico , where in weret o b e placed t h e sacred ut en sils an d vestm en ts used at

t h e Sain t’s altar— a pulpit for t h e church—an d t h e com

plet i on of t h e works in t h e choir . These numerousundertaki n gs required addition al hands , an d as early as

1 52 9 , we fin d a certain Zanetto da Bergamo assistingFr a Damiano . In 1 5 30, on e Francesco di’ LorenzoZambelli was engaged for four years , with a salary“equivalent to that which h e received three years ago ,

before h e returned to Bergamo .

”2 From thi s, we con clude ,that Fr a Damiano was i n Bologna i n 1 52 7 , an d that h eavailed him self of t h e services of t h e sai d Zambelli . Th e

Diary of t h e church furnishes us with an other n otice . Iti s an en try of six dollars given to this Zam be lli Saidsum be ing t h e property of Fr a Dam iano , (h is m as ter )which h e (Damian o) received from t h e m on ks of Sa nGiova n n i , i n Fa r m

, f or sugges t ion s given by h im

r egar di n g t h ei r ch oi r .

” Hen ce , it appears , that our lay

Tassi m ust have m ade a m istake i n h i s tran script, for it was quite i mposs ible t o place a r i ngh ier a (a pulpit or balcon y usually placed i n t h e facadeof a buildi n g) on t h e Ar ea of S. Dom en ico, w ithout destroyi n g i t s un ity.It is clear, therefore, that t h e additi on m ust have been t h e arm ory or pressesm en tion ed i n t h e text.Tass i, loc. cit.

3 In t h e An n ali del C on v. di S. Dom . i n Bolog. we read t h e first ofthese rem ain ed w ith Fra Dam . an en tire year, an d t h e secon d, four . We

have elsewhere a per m ission for a certain Bern ardin o, son of MasterMen acordi , t o rem ain w ith Fr a Dam ian o for six years, i n order to learn t h ear t of Tarsia.

”


brother was invited to Parm a, to give h i s opinion on a

work of im portan ce ; an d this i s a clear proof of t h ee steem i n which h e was held throughout Italy. I havefoun d n o m en tion of Fr a An t on io Asinelli , who , Masin isays, assisted Fr a Dam iano a t t h e works i n t h e choir ofS . Domen ico as well as at t h e others i n S . Michele , i n

Bosco ; but we have a record of an other very distin guishedDomin ican In t ar siat or , a pupi l of Fr a Dam ian o , a n d a

disciple of Da Ber gam o. He executed t h e beautifuldoor that leads from t h e church in to t h e sacristy ; an dwe n ow happily possess t h e e n tries of all t h e sum s laidout on t h e sam e . It was writt en by a cei t ai n Fr a

Lodovi co, t h e Ar ch i st , or cust odian of t h e shrine of S .

Dom en ico . It begins on t h e 6t h of Jun e , 1 5 3 2 , an d

con tai ns t h e various sum s which were given to a pai n te rfor design s ; an d , am on gst others, it m akes di stinct mentionof an Annunciation . Th e door was perfected , an d se t upi n i t s place , Jun e 2 1 , 1 5 3 3 . This door presents on lytwo histories, with som e perspectives, an d it i s so adm ir ablyfin ished, that i t might b e mistaken for B a Damian o’sworkmanship. But as t o t h e latter , h e commen ced t h earmories for t h e shrine of S . Domenico on t h e 1 2 t h of

Decem. , 1 530. Fr a Lodovico h as carefully en tered all

t h e sum s

.

expen ded on it ; 1 an d we first fi n d t h e am oun t

gi ven for t h e designs of t h e en tire work . An d i n a m ar

gi n el not e , this A r ch ist in forms us that they were fur

Th e followi n g is an en try extracted from t h e Ar ch i st’s Book This

is t h e expen di tur e that I, Fra Lodovico, Ar ch i st , have m ade on t h e arm oryexecuted by Fr a Dam ian o, t h e lay-brother, wh o h as n o com peer i n this sortof work in our days. Cun n in gly en ough h as h e con tin ued to get large sum sfrom m e ; n ever h as h e said to m e that I should n eeds pay four li re, or on edollar, or forty Bologn in i, (a sm all Bologn ese coin

,) or even half a dollar ; b uth e was always won t to play on m e after this fashion : Believe m e, dear

b r oth er Lodovi co, I wan t paper or som e such t h i n g ,

”an d th us , wi t h th at dear

ton gue of h i s, h e h as got m uch m on eyf r om m e.”

v


n ish ed by Fr a Leandro Alberti , t h e celebrated writer ,who h as eulogised t h e life an d production s of Fr aDamiano .

l This armory was finished April 1 9 , 1 53 4 ,i . e. after three years an d a half h ad been devoted t o i t scompletion , although i t s len gt h i s som ewhat greater thanthat of t h e seven stalls wh i ch we have described . Itwas rem oved , I know not when , from t h e church t o t h esacristy ; an d it n ow serves as a wardrobe for preservingt h e vestmen t s . There ar e four armories on t h e right an dleft

, on each of whi ch ar e eigh t histories ; four on t h e

upper part , an d as m an y on t h e lower . These on t h e

upper represent passages of t h e Old Testam ent ; an d theseon t h e lower , some scenes in t h e life of S . Dom enico .

On t h e first we find this inscription — “ Th e splen did

wor k of Fr a Dam . da Bergam o An d this truly i s on eof t h e most magn ificen t of our ln t ar siat or ’s productions ;an d i n beauty of design , an d exquisit e fin ish , it i s n ot

inferior to t h e stalls which h e execut ed i nTh e arm ories h ad not ye t been en tirely complet ed ,when t h e reli gious m e t (April 1 2 , 1 5 3 4) t o deli berate on

t h e works which were to b e executed for perfectin g t h echoir. At thismeetin g three question s were discussedlst . Whether they should fin ish t h e n ew choir , forwhich

,besides t h e seven stalls that ar e n ow i n i t s uppe r

part,two others h ad already been executed. 2 md .

Wh ether Fr a Damian o should re tain ,i n h i s service , t h e

Descr i z. di tutta Italia . Fra Dam ian o, of our Order, i s t h e m ost dist i n guish ed In tar siator that h as existed at an y tim e. He so j oin s togetherpieces of wood, that they look l ike a picture executed with t h e pen cil, as m ay

b e seen i n h i s own coun try, i n S. Dom in ic’s at Bologn a, n ay, an d throughout Europe

,wher esoever h is works have been brought.”

3 Th eAr ch i st con cludes h i s j ourn al thus Th e seculars an d t h e religiousare an gry on accoun t of this arm ory an d let those wh o desire to kn ow h owi t was execut ed, ask our Father Lean dro

,wh o laid out m uch m on ey i n pro

cur in g t h e design s for it.

2 30 MEMOIRS o r EMINENT PAINTER S ,

proceed with t h e pulpit, an d t o commence a door for t h echoir . Neither of these exists at present , nor do wekn ow what became of them . Th e splen di d works fort h e choir were not resumed till fully five years afterwards.

But here le t us speak of a small an d exquisite workwhich our artist executed a few years before .

Th e Ben edi ctin e Monks of Perugia, havin g resolvedt o decorat e the ir church with all t h e choicest productionsof ar t , (an d few i n Italy have excelled them i n thisparticular

,) determ in ed t o em ploy t h e best carvers an d

i n t ar si at or s of the ir age , t o execute their magn ificen tchoir. It i s thought that Raffaello furn ished them witht h e designs ; an d of a certainty, I have never seen , n or

do I hope to see , an ythin g m ore exquisite . I t issuch a

miracle of .workm an sh i p an d ar t , that t h e Rev . AbateBin i, a reli gious of that distin guished mon astery of S .

Pe te r , i s actually em ployed en gravin g an d illustratin gi t .1 We ar e t old by Tassi an d t h e Perugian writers ,that t h e ar t ificer of th i s splen di d work was a certainMas t er S t efan o da Bergam o ; but they have n ot told us

that t h is m an was Fm Dam ian o’

s b r ot h er . Nam e ,

coun try , time , profession , (for Fr a Dam i an o h ad a

brother called Stefan o , who was a carver ,) all con spireto convin ce us of this fact. When Stefan o heard thatt h e Ben edi c t ines determ in ed to have t h e door leadin gin to t h e choir ornamen ted with tarsie , h e ten dered themt h e services of h i s brother, (t h e Dom in ican ,) which weregladly accepted , as t h e Be n edictin es entrusted t h e en tirework to h im . He , therefore , executed two h i stories ,toge ther with two heads of Sai nts , on t h e two door-posts ,i . e. , in t h e uppe r part, an Ann un ciation , an d Pharaoh

’

s

daughter savin g Moses from t h e waters of t h e Nile ; an d

S in ce published by Pucci n elli, Rom e .


in t h e lower, t h e head of S . Peter , an d that of S . Paul ,whi ch m ay b e regarded as repetition s of these executedfor t h e choir of S . Dom en ico at Bologn a . This work ,wh i ch was fin ished with consum mate di ligen ce , i s nowmuch in jured. It h as been said that Fr a Damian oexecuted it i n 1 5 3 5 , an d that h e received on e hun dredan d twen ty dollars for h i s labour .But it i s tim e to speak of our In t ar siat or

’

s grandestwork , that i s, t h e choir of S . Dom en ico i n Bologn a, towhich h e devoted t h e rem ain der of h i s life . Havi n gprem ised some historical notices , we will proceed t o

describe it.Th e cypher MXLI . (read MDXLI .) on t h e first stallclearly proves, that t h e choir was com men ced i n 1 54 1 .

In a book of t h e sum s expen ded on sai d church , un derdate , 1 544 , we fi n d that Master Stefano da Bergam o ,Fr a Dam i an o’s brother , was called to t h e assistan ce of t h elatter, by order of t h e Prior, Fr a S t efano , of Bologna ;

1

an d that thi s Master Stefan o h ad a pupil , n am ed Zam pi er oda Padova . They were both lodged an d di eted i n t h e

con ven t , an d they di vided between them a salary of six

an d a half gold crown s . Th e book states that they begant o work , April 2 6 , 1 544 , an d that they con tin ued heretill t h e 2 4t h of August, of t h e sam e year . On t h e 2 5 t h ,

they t ook the ir departure , havi n g been , probably, in vitede lsewhere t o atten d to som e work of urgen cy , as we fi n dthem back again , an d resum in g the ir em ploym en t on t h e

2 4t h of Septem ber . We do n ot know how lon g Master

From t h e book of expen ditur e i n t h e church of S . Dom ,i n Bologn a, ad

an n . 1 544. I rem em ber h ow Stefan o da Bergam o, Fr a Dam ian o’s broth er,agreed w i t h m e (Fr a Stef. di Bologn a) to work at our choir, together w ithh is pupil, Zam piero di Padova, for six an d a half gold crown s. They wereto b e lodged, et c.

,i n t h e con ven t. They com m en wd April 2 6 1 544 they

worked till t h e 2 4t h of August, an d wen t hen ce on t h e 2 5 t h .

2 3 2 m n m om s or EMINENT PAINTER S ,

Stefano con tinued to assist h i s brother. In t h e lastpaymen t m ade to Mast er Stefan o , we di scover that h edem an ded , in lieu of six an d a half crowns, (t h e sum

stipulated ,) seven an d a half, allegin g that before comin gt o Bologn a, Fr a Dam iano h ad written t o h im , statingthat h e should b e e n titled t o so m uch . To put an e n d

to t h e alt ercation , they gave what h e dem an ded , an d

dismissed him . We do not kn ow what port ion s of t h ework should b e attributed to this distin guished artistbut we m ay reason ably ascribe to him t h e greater part oft h e traceries in t h e choir , an d particularly t h e beautifullyexecut ed corn ice , so admirable for i t s design , richn ess ,an d exqui sit e fin ish .

‘ Meanwhile , t h e Dom in ican laybrother, assisted, it i s very likely, by h is confreres ,Be rnardin o , An tonio Asin elli , an dAn t on i o da Lunigian a,prosecuted h i s resum ed labours . On t h e n in eteen th stall ,h e in scribed 1 542 ; an d, finally, on t h e great cornice overt h e las t stall , on t h e right, h e distin ctly traced 1 550,

Fr. Dam ian us , Ord. Pr ae dic . fecit.”2

Havi n g premised so much , we will now speak of t h e

merit of t h e work . Th e act ual choir of S . Dom en icoi n Bologna , numbers 2 8 stalls on e ither side ; an d 2 8in ferior on es, makin g altogether 1 1 2 , of which , however,only t h e uppe r part i s h is tor i ed . On these on t h e right,

‘

h e depicted (i n ta r sia) t h e history of t h e New Testam ent ;

Am id other beauties i n this com ics , n othi n g can exceed t h e gracefuln essof t h e letters for m in g t h e Lati n in sc r iption . They ar e each about a cubit inlen gth , an d presen t various groups of an gels adm irably fin i shed.This i n scr iption m ust have been pla ced here at a som ewhat later period,

as Fr a Dam ian o died i n that year. Tass i says that h e foun d t h e followi n gn otice i n t h e archives of S. Dom en ico

,Bologn a A. D .

, 1 500was com

ple t ed t h e won der ful choir of our church. It was per fect ed i n t h e stylevulgarly called tar sia, by Fr a Dam ian o of Bergam o, t h e lay-brother, a

m em ber of our m on astery, wh o execute d t h e pr es bytery, t h e pulpit, an d t h earm ory for t h e Ar k.

”


execut ed only t h e right side ; an d'

t h at at a later period,

when t h e choir was removed to i t s actual position, an d

when t h e fii ar s foun d t h e old stalls to b e in sufficient fori t s vas t length, some unkn own hand , mayhap a discipleof Fr aDamiano , was employed to execut e a corresponding num ber. Noth i n g can b e more marked than t h e

con trast be tween t h e two arms of t h e choir , n or do werequire much skill to recognise t h e diversity of handsthat pe rformed t h e work .

Th e right ar m , which i s certai nlyFr a Dam i ano’

s work,

presen t s t h e followin g histories - t h e An n un ci at lon

t h e Visitati on of S . E lizabeth— t h e Nat ivity of J C .

t h e Presentation in t h e Temple—t h e Adoration of t h e

Magi— t h e Pur ificat ion — t h e Slaught er of t h e Inn ocents-Our Lord disputi n g with t h e Doctors— t h e Baptismof J. C .

— t h e Tem ptation i n t h e Wilderness— t h e Transfigur at ion

—J. C . healin g t h e In fir m — t h e Multiplicationof t h e Bread— t h e Resurrect ion of Lazarus- Christ’s Trium ph an t en try into Jerusalem— t h e Expulsion of t h eProfan ers from t h e Temple— t h e Last Supper- Ch ristWashing t h e feet of t h e Apostles— Christ Praying int h e Garden— t h e Flagellation— t h e Crownin g withThorns— t h e Cr ucifixi on — t h e Descen t in to Lim bust h e Resurrection— t h e Ascen sion— an d t h e Descent of

t h e Holy Ghost in t h e supper-room .

Not to dwell t oo lon g on t h e varied beaut ies thatadorn t h e right side of t h e Bolognese choir , we will

I My con jecture is str en gthen ed by t h e followin g particulars, which I havefoun d in t h e old book of t h e coun sels of t h e con ven t. A. D. 1 603

, we read .

Fra Giuse p. Pasqualin i , a lay-br other, was i n vested, et c. an d

h e collected t h e alm s which were em ployed to perfect t h e choir, then on lyhalf fin ished.” We read In an other place of t h e perm ission given t o a Bologn ese n oblem en t o bui ld a chapelpr o Ch ar o t r an sf er en do ; an d in 1 6 2 1 , we fin dan other del iberation con cern i n g t h e com plet ion of t h e choir, ‘h ny si nce b egun ,

an d n ot yet perf ected)


conte n t ourselves with rem arkin g , that i n correctn essof design , richness, an d di versity of com position ,

delicacyof carvin g , an d fin ished execution ,

i t i s n ow ise in feriorto t h e first stalls which h e elaborated between 1 52 8,

an d 1 530.

As regards t h e buildin gs represen ted i n these histories ,we would say, that they were desi gned by som e ablearchitect ; an d w e have already observed that t h e

ce lebrat ed Bar ozio da Vignola h ad been em ployed forthis purpose . Some famous pain ter, doubtless, design edt h e figures, in which t h e nude i s m ost correctly ou t

lin ed, to say nothin g of t h e beauty of t h e groupin gan d drapin g. Truly wonderful i s a lan dscape i n t h e

scen e represen tin g t h e Baptism of Jesus Christ ; for itm ay b e regarded as a perfect trium ph over t h e di ffi

cult ies presen t ed to t h e artist , by t h e material on

which h e h ad to work In fact , it looks like t h e

production of a pencil , so deli cat e an d soft i s i t s

shadin g . Th e Last Supper rem in ds us of Li on ardo ’

s

great work in t h e refectory of t h e Grazie at Milan . Tocounterfeit various precious m arbles , h e availed him selfof t h e roots of trees which resem ble t h e vein s an d

colours on t h e s ton e. But t h e eye can no lon gercontem plate t h e varied tin t-in gs which h e im parted toh i s little pictures, sin ce tim e h as almost can celledthem en tirely . As, however , som e traces of t h e colouring still appear on t h e first seven upper pan ellin gs, Idoubt much whether t h e rem ain der were sim ilarly tin ted ,or merely shaded i n Chiaroscuro . On t h e authority ofAlberti , who lauds t h e beauty an d variety of t h e colouri n g of these t a r s i e, we must believe that t h e action of

t h e sun h as seriously in jured t h e tin tin g . Happily,however , t h e part which we thin k i s t h e work of Fr a

Damiano h as been adm i rably preserved . Neither tim e,n or


m an ,nor m oth h as dared to damage thi s glorious produc

t ion ; but we cannot say th i s of t h e left side , whi ch h assuffered much , not from m oths, but from t h e destructivehand of m an . Some savage , in hum an form ,

h as paredoff a con siderable portion of t h e figures an d conjoi n ed

p ieces of wood , substitutin g i n their place bits of lead torepresen t t h e helm ets , shields, cuirasses , an d swords oft h e soldi ers, t h e very sight of wh i ch i s enough to maket h e blood boil in on e’s ve in s .

l This i s all that we havebeen able to collect regardi n g t h e life an d works of thismost distin gui shed In t ar s iat or . According t o Lean droAlbert i , h e died on t h e 30t h of August, 1 549 , havin galm ost fin i shed t h e choir of S . Domenico , wh ich i s t h e

m os t adm i r a b le wor k of i ts sor t i n t h e wor ld .

”2 To t h esplen did en com iums bestowed on h im by Vasar i an dAlberti

, we will add that of Mon s. Sabba da Castiglione,

who, (in h i s Mem oranda) describi n g t h e orn am en tation

of a private dom icile , speaks of h im thusIt was decorat ed withworks in tar sia , byFr aGiovann i

da Mon te Oliveto , or , mayhap , by Fr a Raffaello daBrescia, (who was also of t h e sam e con ven t ,) or by t h eLegn agh i , who were famous in th i s branch , particularlyfor their perspectives. But far excelli n g all these , ar et h e works executed by Fr a Dam ian o da Bergamo , an d Iwould regard them ,

not as hum an , but as di vi n e. Albeit,t h e others whom we have named, were excellent m aster s,this Dom in ican lay-brother surpasses them all, not on lyin perspective , but i n lan dsape , buildi ngs, e t c . ; an d whati s more , i n t h e figures . In fact, wood was to h im whatt h e pe n cil was to t h e great Apelles ; n ay, it appears tom e, that t h e colourin g of these pieces i s more li fe-like ,

Th e great lettern in t h e cen tre of t h e choir is thought t o h ave been t h e

work of Fr a Dam ian o.3 Loc . cit.


t h e thi rd . He speaks of h i m,in h i s catalogue of t h e

Dom in ican artists, in t h e followin g terms Fr aAnton i o di Lun igiana, a lay-brother of S . Romano diLucca, an d di sciple , as i s believed , of t h e sai d Fr aDam ian o , h as executed , i n h i s con ven t of Lucca , someexcellen t pictures (in tarsia) , whi ch m ay b e seen on t h e

doors of t h e sacristy , on t h e lect em s, an d on t h e organ .

He also produced other works of this sort, in t h e libraryof t h e conven t of t h e Madon na della Quercia , which i s notfar from Vite rbo . He died in this con ven t a few years ago,aged about eighty .

” 1 Of t h e works of this Fr a Anton ionon e but t h e followin g exis t —t h e doors of t h e sacristy

,

which, as well as these of t h e conventual church of S .

Roman o di Lucca, ar e decorat ed with t ar sia-wor k. Theyall, however, have been so m uch in jur ed , that only a

miserable remn an t of them survives. On t h e doors of t h esacri sty , h e executed t wo hist ories fi'

om t h e life of Sampson . In these h e represented t h e stron g m an carryin goff t h e gat es of Gaza, an d slayin g t h e lion . On t h e doorsleading in t o t h e church , h e gives us two histories of t h eB . V . M.

,whi ch , though they possess some merit in

fin ish , ar e cert ainly inferior to these by Fr a Damiano .

He also decorated t h e lectern of t h e choir with somepe rspectives, an d two most beautiful heads of SS . Peteran d Paul , wh i ch look like repetitions of these execut ed byh i s mast er , for t h e choir of S . Domenico in Bologn a, an dthat of S . Pietro in Perugia. Th e decorations of t h e

organ of t h e same church , an d these in t h e library dellaQuercia, m en tioned by Razzi , no longer exist ; but therear e som e of h i s tarsie still in t h e pr esb yt ery of S . Mariadel Sasso , n ear Bibbien a. These have been recorded byFather Finesch i , though Razzi h as said n othin g of them .

”

I can say n oth i ng of them , as they have not been well1 Istor. degli Uom . Illustri. Com pen dio Stori co-cr itico, p. 46.


described by t h e former writer. Moreover, many yearshave passed sin ce I saw them . We m ay suppose thatthis artist died about 1 584 or 1 585 , as Razzi

’

s work waswritten about t h e year 1 587 , as h e h i mself te lls us, atpage 3 82 .

If some should pronounce these notices of t h e Domin ican carvers an d i n t ar si at or s to b e j ejun e , we can on lyrepeat what we have stated before , that t h e duties of t h ecloister, in fir m health , an d other circum stan ces, have notperm itt ed us to exten d our researches. We ar e fullyaware that m an y distin guished cultivat ors of these two

ar ts, have flour ished i n many regi on s of Italy ;‘an d we

have been assured that t h e Ven etian domi n ion s possessman y exquisite works by a Dom inican In t ar si at or ; butall our im portunities to obtain in formation on t h e subject ,have utterly failed . Let this b e our apology. En ough

,

however , h as been said to prove that Fr a Damiano daBerg amo alon e main tain ed t h e primacy of t h e Dominicans in carvin g , as we ll as in tarsia.

CHAPTER XIV.

Of som e m i n or Artists of t h e S ixteen th Cen tury.

WE have determi n ed t o treat, in a sin gle chapt er, of

som e artist s, of various region s of Italy, con cernin g whom '

w e have been able to collect on ly fragmen tary n otices.

Fragmentary, however, though theyb e , an d unimportant ,

1 For exam ple, t h e choir of S . Dom en ico (Major) of Naples, was executed( i n n ut wood) A. D. 1 562

, by Giuseppe di. Pareta , a lay-brother of that

con ven t. Th e work cost 866 ducats.—V. Descr iz . Istor. di Dom . Magg. di

Napoli del P. Perrotta.


perhaps, to t h e gen eral history of Italian Ar t s, they willgo to prove how zealously t h e Dom i n icans devotedthemselves to t h e cultivation of t h e same i n a ll theircon ven ts .

Th e first of whom I will speak i s Fr a BartolommeoCoda da Rim in i . This religious was n ot un kn own toVasari an d Lan zi , as t h e form er

,in h i s Life of Giovan ni

Bellin i , inform s us that Ben edetto Coda of Ferrara, wasamon g t h e disciples of Giovan n i , although h e did notprofit thereby. This artist ,

” con tin ues t h e Aretin e ,“ dwelt i n Rim in i , where h e pain ted man y pictures , an dh e left behin d h im a son , called Bart olom m eo , wh opursued t h e same vocation .

” Lanzi , who men tions h i mi n t h e first epoch of t h e Bolognese School , corrects t h eassertion of Vasari , n am ely— t h a t h e did n ot pr ofi t b yBelli n i

’

s t each i n g, adducin g as a proof, t h e very con trary,t h e pain tin g i n t h e cathedral of Rimin i , repre sen tin g t h eEspousals of t h e Vi rgin , which h e pron oun ces to b emediocre ; an d also , that in t h e Domin ican church of t h eRosary , in t h e sam e city , which h e says exhibit s bette rtaste , albeit— not m oder n . He adds , however, that h ecann ot say so much i n prai se of Bar t olom m eo

’

s son ,

“on e

of whose pictures I saw at S . Rocco da Pesaro , painte din 1 5 2 8 , with such excellent method , as alm ost t o remin dus of t h e golden age . It represent s t h e Titular Sain t oft h e church , alon g with S . Sebastiano , standi n g at t h e

throne of t h e Virgin , with t h e addition of beautiful an d

playful Cherubs.

”1 It i s very probable that Ben edett o

‘ Loc. cit. Gio. An drea Lazzarin i, Catalogo delle Pitture di PesaroPesaro

,1 783 , p. 1 4. Con frater n ita di S. Rocco. Th e gran d altar

possesses a n oble pain tin g on pan el. On t h e pedestal on which t h e Virginis sea ted, in presen ce of SS . Seb . an d Rocco

,we read— ‘Bartholom eus

n s is, 1 52 8. Th is m ust b e t h e n am e of t h e pai n ter. A m i coR icci states, t hat thi s pain ti n g was sold an d substituted by an An n un ciati on


t h e other i s rigidly exte n ded alon g Hi s side . Th e

Virgin man ifests all t h e in ten sity of grief so wellbefittin g this m ost dolorous scen e . Her fair hair fallingloosely over h er shoulders, deepen s t h e agonizin g sorrowdepicted on h er features. Sh e i s draped i n a robeapproachin g azure ; a grey m an tle covers h er head an d

bosom , an d nothin g can b e m ore beautiful than i t s

graceful folds .

l Th e upright position of t h e deadSaviour , who seem s to sustain him self by Hi s ow n

stren gth , does n ot appear to b e reason able ; an d , of a

truth, t h e pain te r who represented Him thus , did n o t

con ce ive t h e proper n otion of t h e Word m ade Flesh ,w h o died an d trium phed over death . There i s n o bloodon Hi s sacred body , save som e drops that tri ckle fromt h e crown of thorn s, an d that which oozes from t h e

wound i n His side . In this pain tin g Coda h as provedh im self to b e con versan t wi th t h e m an n er of treatin glights an d shadows, as well as t h e carn ations. Th e latterar e far from bein g harsh or dry ; particularly i n t h e

feat ures of t h e Virgin .

” Ricci thin ks that this workdeserves all t h e en com iums that Lan zi bestowed on t h e

Pesarese picture .

This pain tin g havin g been fin ished to t h e satisfactiono f t h e Saracen i fam ily , they paid our artist t h e eightyflor in s for which they stipulated , an d t h e receipt wasregistered by t h e foresaid Lorenzo Noe , July lst , 1 563 ;that i s to say, after t h e expiration of about seven months.

I This pain tin g h as been rem oved from t h e church to t h e con ven t.3 R icci . loc . ci t . Ran ald i h as foun d t h e follow in g n otice relatin g to thispictur e i n t h e archives of t h e Dom i n ican s of S . Maria di Mercato. A.D .

1 5 62 , Giacom o Saracen i , an d C iuccion e della Pialfa, agreed w ith Fr a Bartolom m eo, an d Master Fran cesco, pa i n ters, of Bim i n i , t o execute their altarpiece in pan el, for t h e sum of eighty flor i n s. This work was fin ished , an dsa id for , by t h e said Saracen i, July 1 , 1 56 3 . Mem . Stor. di 8. M. del


Ricci observes, moreover , that t h e archi ves of t h e Dom inican s i n San severin o , clearly prove these pain ters tohave belon ged to t h e Order of Preachin g-friars, an d thatthey were for a lon g tim e dom iciled i n that city .

1 Moreover, vari ous biographers adm it that they spe n t a con siderable portion of the ir li fe i n other districts . I m ust advert ,how ever, that t h e design ation Master Fran cesco

,son of

Master Sebastian o ,”

(t h e n ephew of Fr a Bartolomm eoCoda) i s not such as would have been given to a

religious.

We , for a lon g tim e flattered ourselves with t h e hopeof bein g able to derive som e valuable i n form ation con

cern in g this excellen t pain ter, from t h e life which Bar uffaldi h as written of h i m ,

an dwhich i s un edited,together

with t h e Mem oirs of other Ferrarese artists, i n t h eErcolan ilibrary at Bologn a ; but a fr ien d who un dertook to m aket h e researches for m e

,h as n o t succeeded as h e could have

desired . Father Ser afi n o Razzi records an other Dom in ican pain ter whom h e m ay have kn own person ally .

This was Fr a On orio Peruzzi , son of Baldas sare Peruzziof Sien a , a m ost excellen t architect

,pain ter of grot

t esques, an d also a good frescoist an d historical pain ter .We can n ot say where our artist was born , as h i s fatherw as perpetually movin g about from place to place , tillh e closed h i s days i n Rom e , where h e di ed , A . D . 1 5 3 6 ,

aged fi f ty-five years . On orio,however , was n o t t h e last

of Baldassare’s son s. Th e father was buried i n t h e Pantheon ,

n ear Raffaello’s sepulchre ; an d t h e in scription on

h i s tom b m en tion s On orio am on gst h i s youn ger childr en .

Hi s paren t taught him t h e rudi m ents of h i s ar t ; an d

Glor ioso. Th e sam e asserts that Master Fran cesco da Rim i n i, was i n San se

ver in o til l 1 576, as appears by a docum en t bear i n g h i s sign ature in tha tyear.

Ricci . loo. ci t .


w ishing, n o doubt, to follow it profession ally , h e appliedhim se lf to study un der som e of t h e m an y disciples ofRaffaello . He took t h e Dom in ican habit i n t h e con ven tof t h e Min erva (Rom e) in t h e year 1 556 ; when h e h adattain ed h i s thirtieth year , an d com pleted h i s artisticstudies . At this period , in stead of following t h e exam pleo f Fr a Giovan n i An gelico , or Fr a Bartolom m eo , h e m adeup h i s min d to ren oun ce t h e pen cil . Nevertheless

,h av

i n g bee n in vited to t h e con ven t of S . Rom an o i n Lucca,t h e Superior prayed h im to pain t t h e pan els of t h e organof their church , an d h e could n ot declin e such a request .He there executed a beautiful perspe ctive i n Ch i a

r oscur o, an d h e pain ted various beautiful children h ar

m on izi n g som e pieces of vocal music . Nothin g can b emore excellen t than this com position ,

which i s partienlar ly rem arkable for t h e beautiful attitudes i n which h eh as depicted these little n ude m elodists .

” After this h ew as frequen tly urged to resum e h i s pictorial studi es , b utall to n o pur pose , as n othin g could in duce h im to r eli n

qui sh h i s resolution . A few years afterwards h e e n dedh i s days m ost devoutly in Rom e .

We ar e in debted to Cam illo Ram elli da Fab i i an o fort h e discovery of an other Dom in ican pain ter, of whom h ew rites to Giuseppe Ran aldi , librarian of S . Severin o , i nt h e followin g term s In t h e parochial church di

Can celli , on t h e Fabrian o estate , there i s over t h e altaron t h e left of t h e gran d altar a pain ting in panel . It

S t oria degli Hom . Illustr i. These pan els do n ot exist. T h e sam e writerm en tion s a certai n Fr a Regin aldo, a n ative of Perugia, whose father was aG erm an . He, it appears, m ade won der ful progress i n pain ti n g ; b ut h e diedof t h e plague, i n 1 5 1 0. Th e Chron icles of S. M. Novella, praise, am on gstothers

,a certain Fra Mattia, of Floren ce, wh o died in 1 52 7, an d Fr a Salva

tore da Arezzo, wh o deceased in 1 5 3 5 . We do n ot possess an y rem ai n s ofthem —V. Borgh igian i , Cron . A n n al .


1 603 . At t h e feet of t h e Virgin there i s a scroll withthis in scription

“ Fr at. Fabian . Ur b i n as.

Ord . Pr aed ica tor .

Pi n geb at .

This pain ter h as been hitherto un known t o t h e historyof t h e Order, as well as to that of Art . I thin k it likely ,con siderin g h i s age an d coun try , that h e m ay have beena disciple of Fr a Carn evale da Urbin o , whose life we have

given i n t h e secon d book of t h e first volum e of theseMem oir s.

l A com par ison of t h e style of t h e t wo mighteasily resolve our con jecture ; but if an y on e will saythat these two pain te rs should not have a place i n a worktreatin g of t h e m ost em i n en t of our artists , I will rem indh im

,that even di stin guished pain ters, afte r expen din g all

their powers on t h e lights an d shadows of t h e prin cipalobjects , do n ot thin k it un worthy of them to in troducemin or subjects , an d various accessories which serve toheigh t e n t h e effect of t h e form er, till t h e whole workbecom es a harm on ious en sem ble of diversified beauties .

For this reason , we have given t h e first place to Fr aBartolom m eo della Porta , an d , in deed , h i s tran sce n dentm erits en title h im to it . Th e m in or artis ts , therefore ,m ay b e regarded as m in or plan e ts revolvin g roun d h i m

,

an d derivin g all their splen dour from this gran d lum in ary .

A m an uscript written by Father Isidoro Ugurgier i, an d n ow i n t h e pos

session of O n orato Porri, t h e publisher, of S ien a, m en tion s, am on gst othercelebrities, t h e followi n g Dom in ican artists1 . Fr a Sebastian o Cacci n i , wh o flourished i n 1 63 7 . Hi s m an n er i sdescribed as good, an d h e is said to have pai n ted m an y pictures.2 . I

’

m Scr afin o da Lucca, a lay-brother of this con ven t

, (S . Dom en i co,)w h o was a d istin guished pai n ter an d sculptor

,wh o also m ade excellen t

m odels i n clay . He deceased, August 4 , 1 5 95 .

3 . Fra Alberto Tran scr igh i , a m aster i n Theology. He was also an

excellen t pa i n ter an d sculptor ; an d si n gularly rem arkable for h is m in iatur esi n wax an dpaper .

scur r r oas , AND ARCHITECTS . 2 47

CHAPTER XV .

S ister Plautilla Nelli, t h e Dom in ican Pain tress, an d other Nun s of t h e sam eIn stitute, wh o cultivated Pain tin g, M in iature, an d t h e Plastic Ar t i nFloren ce

,Prato, an d Lucca.

Wom en have r isen to high excellen ceIn every ar t whereto they give their care.

”

ORLANDO Fum oso, Can t. xx.

IN t h e second decade of t h e sixteen th century, Bolognat h e learn ed ,

”

was j ustly proud of a youn g an d beautifulgirl

,who devoted herse lf to Art ; an d i n that age of

such celebrities as Buon arroti an d Lom bardi , won famefor herself as a sculptress. This girl was Madon naPr oper zia de

’ Rossi , Un requit ed love i s said to havefurn ished them es for h er chisel , an d to have con sign edh er to an early grave . In this respect , sh e was like t h eLesbian Sapho , that weak an d errin g daughter of t h eMuses . But as poesy failed to e n amour t h e Greekm aiden of existen ce , so n e ither could Pr oper zi a

’

s eclat , asa sculptress, propitiat e in flexible destin y, an d they bothdescen ded to t h e sepulchre regre tted an d lam en ted i nt h e April of the ir years. A short tim e before Pr Ope r zi a

’

s

decease , there dwelt i n Floren ce a youn g girl of n oblefam ily, who applied herself to t h e study of pain tin g , an dultim at ely acqu ired as m uch celebrity by h er pen cil , as

did t h e Bologn ese by h er chisel . Un like t h e latter ,however , sh e di d n ot se t h er heart on perishable earthlybeauty , but on t h e celestial an d im m ortal . Need we say,

2 48 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT Pa i n r n a s ,

that h er career an d t erm in ation bore n o resemblance tothat of t h e hapless Pr oper zia ? This youn g noble ladywas Sister Plautilla Nelli , t h e Dominican pain tress.

Sister Plautilla was t h e daughter of Lucca Nelli , a

Floren tin e patrician, an d was born in t h e year 1 52 3 .

Th e name of h er mother h as n ot been tran sm itted t o us,

but we fi n d that sh e h ad a sister called Petron illa, whofollowed h er into t h e cloister, probably about 1 5 3 8 or

1 540. At t h e begin nin g of t h e cen tury , t h e piety of t h e

noble lady , Don n a Cam m illa Ruccellai , h ad com plet edt h e buildi n g of t h e m on ast ery of S . Catherin e , i n t h e ViaLarga, in Floren ce , an d i t s foundress, at t h e instan ce ofFr a Gerolam o Savon arola , h ad de termin ed t o m ake i t sin m ates cultivat e t h e ar t of pain tin g an d m in iaturin g .

Flyin g from t h e evan escen t pleasures of t h e w orld , theset wo siste rs betook themselves to this sacred retr eat , wi thh earts that yearn ed for t h e pure an d holy j oys of heaven .

Gifted with gen ius , an d well educated m in ds , theydevoted themselves to t h e cultivation of ar t s , which wereso well suit ed t o the ir sex an d callin g. Petron illa

,wh o

was given to literature , wrote a life of Savon arola, wh oh ad been m ai nly in strum en tal i n foundin g t h e m on astery ;an d it was from this life , which i s still i n man uscript ,that Father Ser afin o Razzi collected m ate r ials for on e

somewhat sim ilar .‘ Plautilla comm en ced by draw in g an d

‘ S ister Plan tilla's MS. i s n ow i n t h e possession of Pietr o Bigazzi ofFloren ce, w h o kin dly perm itted m e t o exam i n e it. In stead of an origin allife of Savon arola, i t seem s to b e, i n great part, a copy of that wri tten byBurlam aech i , an d publi shed i n Lucca in 1 704 . Petr on illa h as added all t h et radition s an d n arratives con cern in g Fra Ger alm o

, that sh e was able to collect. Alon g with Bur lam acch i

’

s n arr a t ive, sh e h as given us som e adden daby t wo or three otherwr i ters , som e of whom have n ot con cealed thei r n am es,

an d also som e facts that were brought to li ght after Bur lam acch i’

s death.At t h e en d of t h e MS. sh e wrote —“ Here term in at es t h e life of t h eBLESSED GEROLAMO an d h is com pan ion s, written by m e

, S ister

2 50 m am om s or EMINENT PAINTERS,

pe n cil ? He then , probably , direc ted t h e studies of thisSis te r , an d furn ished h e r with h i s own design s an d theseof Fr a Bartolom m eo , all of which h e bequeathed to h er

(accordin g to Vasari) at h i s death , which occurred i n1 547 . More than on ce , I have recogn ised som e

resem blan ce between Nelli an d Sign or acci , as well i noutlin e as i n colourin g , albeit, t h e Pi st ojese i s , i n everyrespect, superior to t h e Floren tin e pain tr ess .

Th e severe rule of m on as tic seclus ion presen ted a greatdiffi culty to this siste r’s proficien cy i n ar t . In fact , sh ecould n ot have studied t h e t r ue, or i n other words , sh e h adn o opport un ity of seein g t h e expression of t h e variouspassion s, whether of an ger , love , or hatred , on t h e hum an

coun tenan ce ; an d , con sequen tly, could n ot develope themi n h er production s with that force

,truthfuln ess , an d

power, which con stitut e t h e ch i efest merits of pain tin g .

Cloiste red within in accessible precin cts ; surroun ded byfaces which mirr ored on ly seren ity an d calm ; perpetuallyi n t h e society of wom en ,

whose un iform ity of disciplin e ,n ay, an d of habilim en t , gave a mon oton ous charact er tothe ir every movem e n t , sh e could not have learn ed t o

pour tray these great passion s i n which t h e han d an d

fan tasy of t h e pain ter m ay b e said to trium ph . Th e

sam e difficulties, or perhaps still great er, were to b eencoun tered by h er i n design an d colourin g , as sh e h adn o m ean s of studyin g— I will n ot say t h e n ude —but t h ean cie n t statues , an d t h e pain tin gs by celebrated m asters .

S h e h ad n o opportun ity of witn essin g t h e variation s oflights an d shadows i n t h e beauteous lan dscape at su n -riseor sun -se t

,when every object i s bathed i n these radi an t

tin ts so charm in g to t h e pain ter’s eye ; n or could sh e

w atch t h e sombre shadows deepen in g gradually in todarkest n ight ; or , t h e m oon ren din g t h e bosom of t h e

clouds,an d sheddin g h e r pale , silvery lustre on t h e


un iverse . Need w e say that sh e could n ot treasure upall t h e kn owledge derivable from books, lon g j ourn eys ,an d con versation s with t h e cogn osce n ti— all of whichar e absolu te ly n ecessary for those w h o wou ld becom e

em in en t i n ar t ? Hen ce,it was, that Sister Plautilla

could apply herself on ly to these easy an d sim ple com ~

position s which di d not require m uch skill i n ar t , suchas Holy Fam ilies , half figures of Sain ts, portraits, e t c .

Withal,this n un boldly un dertook som e gran d an d

copious com position s , which requi red study , ge n ius , an d

great art istic power— he n ce , alm ost all h er pain tin gs ar e

on a large supe rfici es , whi ch i s covered with a m ultitudeof figures. In t h e refectory of S . M . Novella

,there i s

a large picture on can vas, which Sister Plautilla colouredfor t h e refectory of S . Catherin e i n t h e Vi a Larga. I n

this sh e represen ted Jesus Christ , with t h e Apostles ,seated at t h e table of t h e Last Supper ; an d all t h e figuresar e life size . Th e disposition of t h e figures i s m ediocrein deed

,t h e treatm e n t of t h e subj ect rem in ds us of Fr a

Bar t olom m eo’

s en larged style : but there i s , at t h e sam e

tim e,a harshn ess i n t h e ou tli n es

,which belon gs n e ither

to Porta n or to Sign or acci . Th e fi esh es have eviden tlysuffered from retouchin g , an d t h e expression of t h efeatures i s m on oton ous an d in sign ifican t. We ar e toldthat for h er m ale figures, (as sh e could n o t have t h e

n atur al m odel ,) sh e was w on t to copy som e of t h e n un s,an d to pain t them with lon g m oust ach i es, an d flowin gbeards . This attem pt to represen t t h e virile , did n o t

succeed , as t h e regular lin eam en ts , an d un im passion edfeatures, clearly revealed n ot on ly t h e w om an

,but t h e

n un also . Am on gst h er best works i s a Deposition fromt h e Cross, whi ch i s n ow i n t h e Floren tin e Academ y .

Lan zi , speakin g of this work , thi n ks that it was i n ven t edby An drea del Sarto , an d executed by Sister Plautilla.

2 5 2 m an oras or EMINENT PAINTERS ,

I t s con ception som ewhat resem bles t h e Deposition byVan n ucch i , n ow i n t h e Pitti Gallery . In this, also , t h efigures ar e life size . It represen ts t h e Redeem er dead ,an d laid on a wh i t e sheet. St. John

,kn eelin g , supports

His shoulders , an d at Hi s feet i s MaryMagdale n e . Th e

n ude of t h e Saviour, although pretty correctly design ed ,

i s n o t equally well pain t ed. Th e lim bs, m oreover , ar e

not well studied , an d a sin gle glan ce proves that t h ear tiste lacked kn owledge of t h e n ude . Alon g with otherfigures, ar e these of t h e three Maries

,an d three Apostles ,

evin cin g t h e most profoun d grief Th e groun d of t h epicture i s a Perugin esque lan dscape , w ith a view of

Moun t Cavalry. This work exhibits som e traces of Fr aBar t olom m eo

’

s manner,blen ded with that ofAn drea del

Sarto ; t h e heads , too , ar e sufficien tly expressive , but t oofem in in e . I do n ot hesitate to pron oun ce it t h e best ofthis n un ’

s pain tin gs. It i s told that Sist er Plauti lla, whe nstudyin g t h e n ude of t h e Redeem er , took for h er model ,a deceas ed n un , an d that t h e other n un s , banterin g h eron this, were wont to say, that sh e did n ot pain t Cr is t ibut Cr is te .

Another composition ,which presen ted all t h e di ffi cul

ties we have mention ed , w as t h e Adoration of t h e Magi .This, however, sh e pain ted so adm irably , as to m erit forit t h e eulogies of Vasari ; n ay, an d of Lan zi , who saysthat this paintin g was “

all h er ow n in ven tion , an d withlan dscape , which would have don e hon our to a m odern .

At pre sent we kn ow n ot what h as befallen t h e origin al .Som e have thought it to b e t h e sam e Adoration that i s n owin t h e gallery of t h e Ufli zj ; b ut such i s not t h e fact.

History of Pai n ti n g. Flor. School, 2 md Epoch . Th e sam e authoritystates that t h e n oble fam ily of Nelli i n Floren ce possesses a Crucifixion , withm an y excellen t figures, by Sister Plautilla. A t prese n t there i s n o clue t o

this work.


ve n erable an d well-e n dowed Sister, before sh e h ad begunto execute works of im portan ce

,h ad occupied herself

with min iature pain tin g . In this departm en t of ar t ,

therefore , m an y very beautiful little pictures , by h erhan d , m ay still b e seen in t h e possession of di fferen tperson s ; but of these it i s n o t n eedful that I should makefurther m en t ion . Th e best of Sister Plau t illa’s works ar e ,without doubt, those that sh e h as copied from others , b u tfrom these it i s m an ifest that sh e would have effectedadm irable thin gs , if sh e h ad been able to study , as m en do,

f r om t h e life, an d h ad been furn ished with t h e advan tageso f various kin ds , which t h e studen t i n design acquires indrawin g fr om n a t m e. Th e truth of this observation m ayb e perce ived clearly from a picture of t h e Nativity of

Christ , copied by Sister Plautilla , from on e which waspain t ed by Bron zin o

,for Filippo Salviati , an d i s further

m ore made m an ifest by t h e fact, that t h e figures an d facesof wom en , whom sh e could study at h e r pleasure

,ar e

m uch m ore satisfactorily ren dered i n h er works, than ar e

those of m en,an d have a much closer resem blan ce to t h e

truth of n ature . In some of h e r pictures this artist e h as

given t h e portrait of Madon n a Costan za de ’ Don i , i n h erfem ale heads ; this lady i s con sidered on e of t h e brighte stexam ples of beauty an d excelle n ce that our tim es haveproduced ; an d h e r likeness h as been thus depicted bySister Plautilla, i n such a man n er , that for a wom an w h o ,for t h e causes above-m en tion ed , could n o t acquire an y

great exten t of practice , n othin g be tter could b e desired .

”1

This Dom in ican pain tress was rem arkable for h er

pruden ce an d piety, an d was frequen tly e lected superioressof h e r m on as t ery . Sh e died in 1 587 , accordin g to Razzi ,

1 See Vasari 3 Life of Pr opcr z ia de‘ Rossi , tran s. by Mr s. Foster .


an d not , as Richa says, i n t h e year followin g .

‘ Sh e

educated some pupils of h er con ven t i n t h e pictorial ar t,

an d am on g them were Sister Prude n za Cam bi , Sist erAgatha Tr ab allesi , Sister Maria Ruggieri , an d a SisterVeron ica. All of whom

,

” writes Father Razzi,li ve

i n t h e sam e mon astery , a n d lauda b ly employ t h em selves

w i t h pa i n t i n g on ca n vas a n d on pan el.”2 To these

Richa adds two Nun s , w h o were fam ous as m in iaturist-s,

that i s to say, Sister Felice Lupicin i , an d Sister An giolaMi n e r b e t t i .These pupils of Ne lli were n ot t h e on ly n un s w h ocultivated design i n this m on astery . There were otherstoo

, w h o , in stead of pain tin g , devoted them selves tom odellin g i n clay . Th e aforesaid Father Razzi recordssom e sisters of t h e sam e con ven t , (S . Catherin e ’s ,) whocultivated this ar t an d won great praise SisterDion isia Niccoli n i , quoth h e ,

“ produced som e devoutfigures i n relievo , on e of which , a Madon n a

,with t h e

In fan t i n h er arm s , I have rece n tly see n , at Floren ce , i nt h e house of Madon n a Laura da Gaglian o . Siste rAn gelica Razzi , (t h e sister of t h e w riter of this chron icle ,)also executed sim ilar figures i n clay— i . e.

,Madon n as

,

an gels , an d sain ts . Particularly worthy of m en tion i s 3 .

Madon n a that sh e executed i n Pe ru gi a , for t h e chapel oft h e Madon n a (del Rosario) . This figure represen ts t h eVirgin holdi n g t h e sleepin g In fan t on h e r bosom . Thissh e copied from a sim ilar on e , which , a cen tury ago , was

carried procession ally , w ith great ven eration ,i n Floren ce .

Sh e m odelled an other like this for t h e church of S . Marco .

Sh e i s alive at presen t , AD . 1 587 . In t h e m on astery of

l Razzi , S t or. degli Illustri dell’ or d . de’ Pred. Mon ache Pittrici . Richa

otiz. delle Chiese Fior. Father Biliotti says sh e died, aged 65 , havin g spen t5 2 years i n t h e cloister .Razzi. loc. C i t .


S . Vin cen zo , at Prat o , there ar e m an y n un s who devotethem selves to paintin g. Certain an gels execute d bythem

, ar e to b e foun d everywhere through Italy, an d

they ar e m uch ven er a t ed , b ecause t h ey h ave b een pr oduced

i n , t h i s m on as t ery, where there ar e , at presen t , 1 50 n obleservan ts ofGod

, govern ed by t h e prioress, Sist er Catherin ede

’ Ricci, a Floren tin e lady , distin guished for h e r

extraordi n ary pie ty .

”l

Nor should we forget to m en tion that m an y Nun s oft h e con ven t of S . Dom e n ico i n Lucca, applied themse lves zealously to t h e study of pain tin g an d -m odellin g .

S igr e Tom m aso Tre n ta, an d Father Federico di Poggio ,have furn ished us wi th som e n otices of them , an d theyar e of opi n i on that t h e most distin guished of theirn um ber should n ot b e forgotten in a work treatin g of

artists .

Th e m ost celebrated of these was Siste r AureliaFioren tin i , who im itated t h e virtues , as well as t h e

artistic production s, of Plautilla Nelli ; an d , like h er , tookFr a Bartolom m eo della Porta, an d An drea del Sarto , forh er m ode ls . Sh e was t h e daughter of Doctor An dreaFiore n tin i of Lucca, an d was born i n that city , i n 1 595 .

Her baptism al nam e was Isabe lla . Possessin g great

ge n ius , an d a beautiful person ,h er father h ad determ in ed

t o m ate h e r w ith som e on e worthy of such a wife ; butIsabella , who w as very reli gious, an d cared little for t h eevanescen t pleasures of life , h ad already m ade up h e rm in d to take t h e habit. Her father, i n t h e hope ofdivertin gh er purpose , caused h er to apply herself to t h e study of

Sh e was can on ized by Ben edict XIV.,A .D . 1 746. In thi s sam e m on as

t ery there was a celebrated poetess, called S ist er Loren za Strozzi. Sh e was

well acquain ted w ith Greek an d Latin , an d com posed elegies an d hym n s i nt h e latter lan guage, which have been tran slated in to Italian an d Fr en ch.S h e died aged 70, i n 1 59 1 .


Th e Lucchese writers m en tion a Sister Brigid Franciotti , of t h e mon astery of S . Giorgio , who took t h e

Domin ican habit i n 1 5 3 2 , as a very distin guishedpain tress an d m odeller .1 They also state , that there wasa Sister Agn ese C as t r ucci , an d a Sister Eufrosin a Burlamacchi

,both very excellen t m in iaturist s .

2 Sist er

m an y figures of an gels, e t c. an d it was form er ly over t h e altar of t h echurch. It h as been substituted for Bar t on i ‘s S. Catheri n e. Over t h e altarof t h e i n fi r m ary, is a sm all picture represen tin g t h e B . V. M. w ith t h e In fan tan d suspe n ded from t h e wall i s a la rge pain ti n g of t h e Deposi t ion from t h e

C r oss. In an other apartm en t of t h e con ven t ther e i s a picture represen tin gt h e Blessed E n r ico Suson e, of t h e Preachin g—friars.In t h e hall there is a large altar-piece represen tin g t h e B . V. on a thron e,

surroun ded by m an y sa in ts, am on gst whom ar e S. M. Magdalen e, S . Lucia,S . Catherin e, an d other holy protectresses of t h e con ven t, et c. At foot of t h ethron e there i s an an gel playin g an i n strum en t. This i s i n Fra Bar t olom m eo

's

m an n er .

O n t h e gran d altar of t h e public church there i s n ow a pain tin g by t h esam e han d

,which h as been substituted for on e by Fr a Bartolom m eo , whi ch

h as been rem oved to t h e co n ven t. Said picture represen ts t h e Madon n aseated on a pedestal, behi n d which there i s a n iche, where we behold t h eVirgi n

,havin g i n h er arm s t h e Divi n e I n fan t, wh o blesses S . Dom in ic, whilst

t h e later kisses His foot. Th e sai n t i s on t h e right of t h e pictur e, bes idesaid pedestal, a nd we see on ly t h e upper part of h i s fig ure, t h e rest bein gcon cealed by t h e full len gth figure of S . Catheri n e, w h o is i n t h e foregroun d,on t h e right of t h e thron e. On t h e left i s S . Vi n cen zo : an d we see on ly t h eupper half of h is figure, t h e un der half bei n g hidden by t h e full len gthfigure of S . Magdalen e

,a t whose feet i s seated a l ittle an gel , playin g a la t e

Th e drapery of t h e Vir gi n i s i n Fr a Bar t olom m co’

s style, an d h er head iscovered with a little white cloth. T h e In fan t (n ude) i s pai n ted w ith greatdelicacy an d corr ectn ess of design . His action is i n t h e Rafi ‘

aelesque style,an d resem bles on e by Credi, which I have seen at M ilan . Th e drapery of 8 .

Catheri n e i s graceful an d flow in g. At h er feet i s a wheel w ith i r on spikes ;an d t h e Martyr h as a palm -bran ch i n h er han d. Magdalen e h as t h e accustem ed vase of balsam i n h er right han d

,an d a book i n h er left. Th e whole

com position rem in ds us of Fr a Bartolom m eo an d A n drea del Sarto.Docum en ti per Servire alla Storia Pat-I la. Stor. delle belle arti, d i

Tom asso Tren ta, Lucca, 1 82 2 . Fed. di Poggio,Mem or ie riguardan ti la

Religion e Dom en ican a.Loo. ci t .


Be rn ardi n a Ruschi , of t h e sam e m on astery, i s m en tion edi n t h e con ven tual Necrology thus Septem ber 1 1 .

Sister Bern ardin a Ruschi , a pain tresson can vas

,died . Sh e pain ted m any

im ages on w alls an d on can vas , an d t h e altar-piece of

t h e church , an d t h e cr ucifix es (on can vas) i n t h e cells.

In h e r,our con ven t h as suff ered a great loss.

” 1 FatherFeder ici cli Poggio rem arks

,that if t h e altar-piece at

presen t i n t h e church b e her’s , sh e m ust have been a

highly gifted pain tress. It i s certain ,however , that t h e

m on astery h ad great reason to regre t h er dem ise , as weread , t h a t h er pict ur es on ca n vas wer e of t h e gr ea t es tb en efi t to t h e con ven t . 2 In deed

,m ediocre works ar e very

rarely of much utility . Th e chron icle which Federiciquotes

,goes on to say, that sh e pain ted excelle n tly on

can vas , an d execu t ed t h e picture of t h e Ann un ciation fort h e church, an d also decorated t h e corn ices an d capitalsof t h e pillars . Sh e also restored t h e picture of S .

Dom in ic, an d t h e figure of t h e Virgin , an d these of t h e

two holy wom e n .

”Th e sam e chron icle states , that Sister

Alessan dra Gui dicci on i , an d Sister Ludovica Carli ,pain ted various m in iatures i n t h e choral books belon gin gt o their m on as tery . May the ir exam ple in fluen ce oth ers .

We m ight add many n am es to these we have beenrecordi n g ; but these few ar e , i n every respect

,calculated

to reflect hon our on t h e Order of S . Dom in ic . Th e littlewe have said of our pain tresses , will prove that t h eDom i n ican n un s, despite t h e m an y obstacles which theyh ad to e n coun te r in cultivatin g Design ,

in herited t h e

S ister Ber n ardin a Ruschi took t h e habit i n 1 6 1 9,an d died i n 1 649 .

2 Echard Sopr an i an d Professor Rosin i praise a S isterTom m asin a Fieseh i,

a Dom in ican n un,an d n iece of S . Catherin e of Gen oa, as a distin guished

pain tress. Sh e belon ged t o t h e con ven t of SS . Filippo e Giacom o, of thatC ity

,b ut n on e of h er pain t in gs exi st.


artistic tastes, which t h e Angelico an d Fr a Bartolommeodella Porta bequeathed t o our In stitute . Need we say,that they deserve our profoun dest respect an d veneration ?

CHAPTER XVI .

Father Ign atius Dan ti, Mathem atician , C osm ographer, En gin eer, an dArchit ect.

ALTHOUGH t h e Preachin g-Friars applied themselveszealously , for m an y ages , to t h e cultivation of all t h e artsof design , I would say that they devoted them selvese specially to pain tin g an d architecture ; so m uch so , thatit would b e diffi cult to pron oun ce which of these twoobtain ed t h e greatest am oun t of their predilection . It i strue , in deed, that they did n ot begin to cultivate pain tin gtill t h e fifteen th cen tury ; but, as to architectur e , it m ayb e said to have been their first

, an d chiefest study, n ordid it ever, for a m om en t , aban don t h e cloisters

,which

it h ad erected for them . Pain tin g numbers am on gst i t sdevot ees

,on ly hum ble Friars , an d pious Nuns ; whereas ,

architecture presen ts to us t h e n am es of m en celebratednot on ly for civil an d religious scien ces, b u t ,

’

also , for t h ehigh dign i ties con f erred upon them — n ay, an d for t h esacerdotal charac t er which shed additional lust re on t h e

cultivators of this ar t . Hen ce it i s that we fi n d disti n

gui sh ed theolog ian s an d literary m en ,Cardi n als an d

bishops, w in n in g ren own for them selves by t h e exerciseof this delightful scien ce . Th e history of architecture inour Order

,dat e s i ts com m en cem ent as early as t h e tim es

of t h e two hum ble lay-brothers , Fr a Sisto , an d Fr a


delineated an d coloured for t h e Gran d Duke Cosimo t h eFirst ; but as such works h ad more to do with scien cethan with ar t

,h e h as n o t obtain ed that distin guished

place am on gst t h e Italian artists to which h e was certain lyen titled . But Dan ti was also a great en gin eer an d

architect, an d as such , we deem it our duty to speak o f

h i m .

1

Ign atius (whose baptism al n am e was Pellegrin o) wasborn i n Perugi a , A .D . 1 5 3 7 . Hi s pare n ts were GiulioDanti , t h e goldsm ith , an d Bian cofior e Alberti . Thisfam ily en joyed all t h e hon our an d respect with which a

noble an d cultivated com m un ity i s accustom ed torem un erate high deserts . Th e profession of t h e fi n e arts

,

moreover , con ferred great celebrity on t h e Dan ti , forthey revived , i n Perugia , t h e exam ple of t h e Gaddi an dGhirlan dai fam ilies , wh o , i n Floren ce , perpetuated ar t

from father to son , an d m ade it alm ost tradition al . Our

Pellegrin o h ad been preceded by Pier Vin cen zo , a civi larchitect ; b y Giovan n i , a m ilitary e n gin eer ; an d byTheodora , a pain tress , all of whom w ere h i s in timat erelatives. He also h ad a brother called Vin cen zo

, wh o

was a pain ter an d sculptor2 of som e celebrity,an d h is

sen ior by seven years . It was thus that t h e youthfulDan ti h ad an opportun ity of cultivatin g t h e arts withint h e dom estic precin cts , where such study was n everseparated from that of religion an d v irtuous pursuits .

Happy , in sooth , i s t h e child whose you n g heart rece ivesi t s earliest im pression s from t h e lovin g lips of good an d

l Fathers Echard an d Qui et i f did n ot study t h e life of this Dom in ican as

they should , an d their biogr aphy of h im ought t o b e recast. There i s a MS .

Chron icle i n S. Marco at Floren ce, which con ta in s a valuable m em oir of Dan ti,whom Father Razz i kn ew person ally. We will extract our n otices from t h e

un published Mem oir, an d also from that by Professor Ver m iglioliGio. Batt. Verm iglioli , Biografia degl i Scrittori Perugin i .


educat ed paren ts . While still a mere boy,h e learned

t h e rudim en ts of pain tin g an d architecture from h i s

father , an d h i s aun t , Theodora .

l But our Pellegrin o wasnot so en am oured of t h e “ beautiful ,

”

as to neglect t h egraver an d m ore practical studies ; an d as n atur e hgifted h im with taste for sublim e speculation s

, aftermakin g h i s first essays i n design an d colourin g

,h e

devoted him self wholly to m athem atics an d n aturalsciences . As such pursui ts requi re peace

,Silen ce , an d

solitude , Pellegrin o , who w as always religiou sly in clin ed ,determ in ed to en ter t h e Dom in ican cloister , bein g con

v i n ced that h e could n owhere else fi n d better opportun ityfor m aturin g h i s in tellect . He h ad n ot ye t com pletedh i s nin e teen th year, when h e received t h e habit of t h ePreachin g-Friars , i n t h e con ve n t of h i s n atal city. He

was invested by Father An gelo da Di ace t o , t h e Rom an

Provin cial , on t h e 7 t h Of March,1 555 , an d chan ged h i s

baptism al n am e for that of Ign atius .

2 Havin g fin ishedt h e course of Theology an d Philosophy , h e zealouslypreached t h e Divin e word ; an d Razzi in form s us thath e becam e a very graceful pulpit orator . Never t h e

less , h i s earlier pursuits h ad t h e m ost decided charm sfor h im ; an d , withou t aban don in g ecclesiasticalstudies, h e devoted him self zealously to t h e cultivationof Mathem atics, Astron om y, an d Geography. Suchstudies redoun ded to t h e hon or of religion ,

an d en largedt h e con fin es, which , i n that age , seem to have beennar rowed an d circum scribed by Scholasticism . In our

Opin ion t h e surest m ean s of destroyin g superstition ,an d

particularly t h e deliriums of Judicial Astrology , in which

l Lan zi m akes hon ourable m en tion of Teodora Dan ti , an d states that sh efollowed t h e m an n er of Pietro Perugin o an d h is scholar s—V. Rom . School ,Epoch 2 .

2 Razzi, Cron aca, M.S.


t h e people of that period h ad such blin d faith , was toaban don , for ever, t h e absurd system Of terrorism ,

an d

cruel pun ishm en t, an d to diffuse t h e study of n atur al an dphysical scien ces , m akin g them , as i t were , a ladder t oascen d to t h e All-sapien t an d b en i ficen t Author of t h e

Un iverse .

Durin g t h e period of these studies , Vin cen zo , Ign atius’

s

brother, was em ployed by Cosim o t h e First , i n Floren ce ;

an d t h e Gran d Duke m an ifested t h e greatest respect fora youth who , i n h is earliest period , rivalled t h e m aste rm in ds of t h e m odern Athen s.

Cosim o h ad determ in ed to revive , in h i s newlyacquired ! dom in ion

, astronom ical an d m athem aticalstudies, which h ad been lon g n eglected ; an d when h eh ad open ed h is min d to Vin cen zo on thi s project, t h elatter urged h im to em ploy h i s brother, who was thenfar -famed for h i s profoun d kn owledge of these scien ce s .

Th e Duke adopted t h e suggestion ,an d im medi ately

in vited Ign atius t o h i s court , where h e m ade provisionfor h im

, an d appoin ted h i m h i s m athem atician . We don o t kn ow t h e precise date of this fact, b u t we havereason to thin k that it m ust have been 1 567 ; or

,

probably 1 565 . It i s certain ly m arvellous that a m an

of h i s years (Ign atius h ad n ot then com pleted h i stwe n ty-eighth) could have so thoroughly m ast ered thesedifficult scien ces , for h e h ad n ow won t h e reputationof bein g an em in en t m athematician an d archi t ect, an d

h i s fam e h ad reached t h e ears of h i s holin ess , t h e

Pope . About t h e period of this appoin tm en t, Pius t h eFifth h ad been raised to t h e Pontifical Throne— thati s to say, on t h e 7 t h of Jan uary , 1 566 ; an d as t h e

n ewly elected Pon tiff belon ged to t h e Order of t h e

Preachin g-Friars , h e determ in ed to erect, i n h i s n atalplace

, (Bosco ,) near t h e city of Alessan dria, a magni


con tin ued t i ll 1 5 73 , we lear n that t h e architect was i nBosco ; an d we ar e in form ed that h e mean t to se t ou t forFloren ce , i n t h e May of 1 567 . Other en tries gi ve us toun de rstan d that h e dwelt i n said place durin g t h e e n tireof t h e year 1 568 . A le tter dated Rom e

,May 1 567 , an d

w ritte n by Father Se r afi n o G r i n delli , a Can on Regular ,to Father Vin cen zo da Pav ia , corroborates this fact , forit tells us that t h e Master h as written an en t t h e church ,hopin g that h e an d Fr a Ign atius will b e able to satisfyh is Holi n ess, e tc .

, e t c . Said “ Journ al” in form s us thatFr a Ign atius rece ived , on t h e 1 4th of April

, 1 569 , t h e

sum of t en crow n s, for t h e expe n ses of h i s j our n eythither ; together w ith t e n more for t h e plan of t h ebuildin g .

‘ Th ese en t r i es ar e quite satisfactory as to t h epart which Fr a Ign atius h ad i n t h e work . They alsoC ertify us that h e dwelt for som e tim e i n Bosco

,an d

leave n o doubt as to t h e year i n which h e return ed toFloren ce . Here , however , I deem it opportun e to m aket wo rem arks con cern in g Ign atius

’ con n ection with thisedifice . In t h e first place , t h e prim itive design by t h e ‘

Perugian architect , w as n ot carried ou t ; for , i n fact, t h econ ven t of Bosco bears n o resem blan ce to that Of S .

Marco , i n design ,or execution — i n t h e secon d place

,I

m ust advert , that t h e in ten tion , as well as ge n erosity , oft h e Pon tiff, m ay b e said t o have bee n defrauded , for when

Th e origi n al design of this buildi n g i s n ot t o b e foun d a t presen t ; i n t h eChurch , however, over t h e altar of S . A n ton io, there i s a sketch of t h e chur chitself on w ood, b ut i t s author i s un kn own . Th e loss of t h e or igin al plan i sm uch to b e deplored , for if we h ad it we m ight b e able t o form an idea ofwhat this con ven t m ight have been . As i t i s, it n ow ise correspon ds with t h egran d design of t h e i n gen ious an d learn ed architect, Father Dan ti. Had t h e

origin al plan been carried out , to say n othin g of t h e solicitude an d zeal of i t sm agn an im ous foun der, (S. Pius V.) i t m ust have been a very differe n t orderof buildin g fr om that which exists at prese n t.


we rem em ber t h e en orm ous sum gold crown s)l

which S . Pius expen ded on t h e structure , every on e

m ust adm it that a very differen t result should have beenexpected , in stead of t h e in elegan t edi fice that n ow

exists. It i s true that t h e con ven t of Bosco i s rem arkablefor solidity an d m agn i ficen ce , b u t it does n ot possess a

sin gle on e of these graces which Vitruvius would have

given to an y edifice . In a word , it i s defective as far as

con ven ien ce , harm on ious arran gem en ts , an d light ar e

con cern ed . I thin k it probable that t h e buildin g wascon fided to Martin o Lon ghi , afte r t h e Dom in icanarchitect h ad gon e away ; an d that t h e Pon tiff , at a

subsequen t period , sen t thither t h e Lom bard sculptoran d architect , Giacom o della Port a, to m easure an d

estim at e t h e work already executed . Thus,i n all

probability, t h e prim itive design was altered ; e itherarbitrarily , or with t h e con sen t of t h e Pon tiff him self, tot h e great detrim en t of t h e buildi n g . Th e ch ur ch ,

h ow

ever,did n o t un dergo an y very im portan t chan ges, an d

it was destin ed to establish Dan t i'

s pr e-em in en ce as an

archite ct .Havin g return ed to Floren ce , Father Dan ti se t aboutteachin g Mathem atics, applyin g him self, at t h e sam e

tim e, to h i s loved studi es of Astron om y an d Cosm o

graphy , i n t h e con ven t of S . M . Novella , where Cosim o

de’ Medici oft en hon oured h im w ith h i s presen ce ; 2 for

h e took very great pleasure i n con tem platin g t h e m aps ,astrolabes, an d other works produced by t h e learn ed

Thi s en orm ous sum was expen ded on t h e buildi n g between 1 566 an d

1 57 2 .

2 Father Razz i tells us that t h e Gran d Duke supplied h im w ith everythin g that h e required ; an d that h e very frequen tly visited h im i n S. M.

Novella, an d con versed fam iliarly w ith t h e lear n ed Father,wh o a t this period

was teachin g m athem atics, et c. to t h e flower of t h e Floren tin e n oblesse.

2 68 ru m ours or EMINENT m m r n n s ,

Friar, who , at this period , wrote a book e n titled Th e Use

an dCon stru ction of t h e Astrolabe .

” In 1 572 , h e delin eat edt h e first gnom on on t h e facade of S . M . Novella.

‘ In

1 5 73 , h e tran slated , in to Italian , t h e Treatise by ProclusLiceus, on t h e Sphere , an d dedicat ed it to Cardin alFerdin ando de’ Medi ci , w h o h ad studied Mathematicsun der h i m . In t h e sam e year h e published a work onEuclid an d Heli odorus Lar i sseus . No on e will den ythat such production s as these ren dered in valuableserv ices t o scien ce . In 1 574 , h e delin eated t h e secon dgn omon on t h e facade of S . M . Novella . At this preciseperiod , t h e Gran d Duke , Cosim o t h e First, who h adexpen ded enorm ous sum s on a collection of objects ofar t an d antiquity , caused arm ories to b e con structed forthem , an d com m ission ed Father Dan ti t o delin eatethereon , with all possible accuracy , t h e geographicalcharts of all Europe . Dan ti devoted him self sedulouslyto h i s work , an d succeeded so adm irably , as t o elicit t h ehighest en com iums . Vasari says of these maps,

“ Therenever h as been , at an y tim e

, a greate r, or a m ore perfectwork .

”2 Father Ser afi n o Razzi , however, gives us toun derst and t hat Dan ti m erely design ed this im m ensework , an d caused it to b e coloured un der h i s own eyes ,by h is scholars , not be in g able to do so him se lf

, on

accoun t of h i s multifarious avocations. These chartsm ay still b e seen i n t h e Palazzo Vecchio ; an d in st ead of

giving t h e prolix description , writ te n by Vasari , we willquot e what t h e em in e n t geographer, Marm occh i

,h as

said of them .

3

V. Xim en es wh o h as written of this gn om on , an d Fi n esch i’

s“ Le t t er a

sulla faecia ta di S . M. Novella.

”Th e later gives us a beautiful in scri ption

com posed by F. Dan ti , for t h e tom b of h is cousin , wh o was in terred i n S.

M. N., A .D . 1 5 70.

3 Degli Accadem ici del Disegn o. , v. 1 1 . Ed . Pass igli . 1 83 8.

They m ake in all 53 . Europe 1 4 , Afri ca 1 1 , As ia 1 4, an d Am erica 1 4.


maps , representin g distan t coun tries , h e h as pain ted t h evarious an im als in digen ous to them . Nothin g can sur

pass or equal t h e in scription s which h e h as deli neat ed .

Th e names of t h e moun tai n s , rivers , an d provin ces , ar e

frequen tly written i n r ed charac t ers . Th e i n scription so f t h e sea , t h e n am es of t h e ports , sm all islan ds , rocks,e t c . ar e traced e ither i n gold or silver ; an d they ar e

thrown out in to stron g relief by t h e green or azuregroun d which our geographical pain ter h as given t o t h e

wate rs. Th e titles of t h e m aps, which ar e given w itht h e greatest exactn ess, m ay b e read i n letters of gold at

t op of t h e sam e ; an d t h e notes an d epigraphs, by m ean s

of which t h e g eogr aph er mean t to give a brief descr ipt ion of t h e region represen ted i n t h e m ap, together witht h e natural curiosities of t h e sam e , ar e con tain ed i n scrollswhich ar e in variably very exquisit ely depicted , both as

regards design an d colourin g . Th e m ap represe n tin gAsia Min or , Syria , an d t h e islan d of Cyprus , gives us a

lofty idea of t h e classic erudition of ou r geographe r ; an d

t h e same m ay b e said of t h e n ote which h e h as appen dedt o t h e m ap represen tin g t h e portion of Southern Asia ,now kn own as Hin dostan ,

together with t h e adj acentislan ds . In truth

,this m ay b e regarded as an eviden ce

of Den ti’s soun d learn in g ; for , i n this n ote h e un dertookt o prove that t h e Golden C h er son esus of t h e an cien ts,corresponds to t h e great island of Sum atra, an d n ot tot h e pen in sula of Malacca, as t h e learn ed of h i s twee

fan cied . I con clude , it i s very m anifest from all this ,n ot t o speak of what m ay b e collected from a diligentstudy of these maps which Dan ti pain t ed on t h e door s .of

t h e arm ories , that they ar e a precious m on um en t ofgeogra

ph ical erudi t ion ,an d of t h e difficult ar t of ch ar t ogr aph y.

”l

Filippo Moise, I llus t r az. Stor -Ar t is t ica del Palazzo Vecch io. Besides

SCULPTORS , AND ARCIIITECTSL 2 7 1

Nobody h as given us precise in formation of t h e periodi n which Dan ti com ple t ed this im por tan t work ; an d I

w ill here observe , that Vasari , speakin g of Vin cen zo an dIgn azio Dan ti , i n t h e secon d edi tion of h is Lives, an ddescribin g t h e geographical works of t h e latte r for t h earm ories of Cosim o I .

, gives u s to un derstan d that, at

th at period Ign atius h ad n o t con cluded h i s labours .

Wherefore , as t h e secon d edition of Vasari did not appeartill 1 568, I con clude that Ign azio h ad n o t then perfect edh i s splen did un dertaki n g .

Whilst this truly learn ed m an was e n gaged i n lect uri n g o n Mathem atics

,Astron om y , an d Geography , t h e

Gran d Duke , Cosim o , h ad con ce ived a grand proj ect ;n or i s it im probable that it h ad be en suggested t o h i mby Ign azio Dan ti . As n ature h ad placed Tuscan yalm ost i n t h e cen tre of Italy , i t would seem as though ith ad been destin ed to b e t h e heart an d em porium of all

t h e wealth of t h e pe n in sula ; as it h as ever bee n of Italianrefin em en t. To this ideal prospe rity , t h e rugged chai no f t h e Apennin es, which m ay b e said t o girdle fertileTuscan y , seem ed to prese n t an in superable difficulty.

Every on e kn ows that Flore n ce h as on ly on e passagethrough this m oun tain ous barrier to t h e Mediterran ean ,

an d th a t n ature h as thus separat ed t h e e n tire Duchyfrom Liguria an d Rom agn a , an d shut it ou t from t h e

subalpin e provin ces of eastern Italy, as we ll as from t h e

Adriatic . Now , if an y on e could have bee n foun d equalto t h e task of tun n ellin g through t h e Ape n n in es, or

e ffectin g a com m un ication be tween t h e two se as , ( t h eAdr iatic an d t h e Tyrrhen e

,) Floren ce , beyon d all doubt,m ust have becom e t h e em porium of Italy , an d on e of

these fi f ty-three m aps, Father Dan ti pa in ted t wo large on es of t h eWorld, forC osim o I. In height they ar e about three an d a half braccia each —V.

Vasar i an d Father S . Razz i.


t h e most populous an d flourish i ng of t h e Europeancapitals . Such a gran d project as this should not b eregarded as vision ary

,for greate r an d far m ore ar duous

un dertakin gs have been realised in former times ; an d,in deed , at t h e very pe riod when men ’

s min ds werespeculatin g on this subj ect, t h e people of Languedoc h adde t ermin ed to unite t h e Mediterranean to t h e Ocean .

At a subsequen t period , t h e glorious genius of PierrePaul Riquet , effected this mighty work , which reflectedsuch hon or on him , an d so wonderfully con tributed tot h e prosperity ofFran ce .

1

None , save on e profoundly versed in Mathematics an dEngin eerin g ; or , in other words, non e but a m an whosesoul teemed with solid theories, an d these grand practicalconclusions which ar e t h e result of matured expe rien ce ,could have ven tured to engage in such a mighty w ork ,i n every respect so worthy of Italian gen ius . In fluen ced

,

n o doubt , by such consideration s, t h e Gran d Duke ,Cosimo , selected Father Ignazio Dan ti , to con duct t h eworks ; for, although t h e latter w as then on ly thirty-fiveyears of age , h e h ad given such proofs of h i s eruditionin all scien ces, as to secure for himself t h e entire con fi

den ce of h i s Prince . Can tin i , i n h i s h i story of t h e Duke ,Cosimo t h e First, h as put us in possession of this fact sohon ourable to t h e Prin ce an d t h e archit ect, of whom h eh ad made choice ; an d t h e historian tells us that h e wasindebted for h i s knowledge of what we have been statin gto Bartolomm eo Conci , Secretary t o Duke Cosim o , whospeaks of t h e subject i n a letter dated Pisa, April 2 4 ,

This ship—can al was com m en ced i n 1 680. It is fifteen leagues i n len gth,an d cost seven teen m illion s. A ccordi n g to Dupon t de Nem our s it pr oducedfor t h e treasur y, in on e cen tury, l ittle less than 500 m illion s i n taxes,im ports, etc.

2 74 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAIN TERS,

i n terruption s which should in evitably b e occasi on ed byt h e aforesai d causes . A s to h i s successor , t h e Gran dDuke Fran cesco , h e was n o t able to en coun ter t h e

e n orm ous expen diture , which such an extraordin aryun dertaki n g m ust i n volve , an d it was thus that Tuscan ywas deprived of a work that should have con tributedimm en sely to i t s resource s .

Though this proj ect was n ot realized,it can n ot fail t o

con vin ce us of t h e high estim ation i n which Father Dan tiw as held at that period , for we have seen that h e waschosen to b e t h e architect . an d en gin eer of such a m ar

vello n s w ork . Neither would we credit Can tin i , whow ould have us believe that this proj ect was origin atedi n Fran ce , sin ce it i s far m ore like ly that Fran cis 1 .

h ad been in form ed of Dan t i’

s plan by Duke Cosim o ; an dthat t h e form er availed him self of t h e reveren d father

’

s

suggestion s . Certain it i s that n e ither t h e kin g of Fran cen or t h e Gran d-Duke m edi tated this great work , with t h ei n ten tion of leavin g i ts execution to those who cam e

after them . For our part , we would fain hope thatBan tl s proj ect an d t h e gen erous in ten tion s of t h e Medici ,m ay n o t have been thrown away on Tuscan y or Italy .

Perhaps t h e day i s n o t distan t , when , by m ean s of can als,tun n ellin gs, an d railways , t h e in habitan ts of Emilia an d

Ven ice m ay b e brought in to in tim ate relation with t h e

people of Tuscan y an d Liguria !In t h e year 1 5 74 , Fathe r Ign azio Dan ti lost h is gener

ous patron ,Cosim o I . who , at that period , passed ou t of

this life ; but h is successor, Fran cesco I . ,to whom h e h ad

taught m athem atics , retain ed h im i n h i s service , an d

secured to h im t h e stipen d granted by h is father. Th e

Dom i n ican , however, did not tarry lon g i n Floren ce ; fort h e Un iversity of Bologn a was desirous of havin g h im as

professor of Mathem atics an d Astronom y ; an d it i s very


probable that t h e Pope in t erpose d to prom ote t h e in te re sts of said Un iversity . It would appear that h e se t ou t

for Bologn a between 1 575 an d 1 5 76 ; an d Alidosi saysthat h e rem ain ed there till I will n ot here en u

m erate t h e various learn ed production s of this distin

gui sh ed writer, as they m ay b e foun d i n t h e pages o f

Ver m igli oli , an d as they ar e n ot distin ctly con n ected w itht h e subject-m atter of this Mem oir ; but i n lieu of themI will m en tion an architectural work which h e de

sign ed durin g h i s soj ourn i n Bologn a— a chape l whichwas built at that period i n t h e ch urch of S . Dom e n ico , i nthat city . We ar e in debted to Razzi an d C re tti for an

accoun t of it ; an d they both in form us that it was calledt h e chapel of All t h e Relics . This work , however , n o

lon ger exists, as it was destroyed when t h e church w as

re stored .

Whilst h e w as teachin g i n B ologn a , Pietro Gh i slie r i ,govern or of Perugia ; in vited Father Ign azio to h i s n ativec ity

,where , at t h e request of h i s com patriots , h e de

sign ed an d coloured charts of t h e suburbs an d augustte rritory of t h e Perugian Republic , which m ay still b esee n i n a hall of t h e palace de i Sign ori . This work w as

subsequen tly exhi bite d at Rom e ; an d h e added to it t h evarious castles an d bridges of t h e Tiber , together w itht h e prin cipal obj ects of said region . He also produced a

coloured chart of t h e t erritory of Orvieto , which waspublished i n Rom e , A .D . 1 583 ;

2 b u t Fathers Qui e t i f an d

Echard seem to have bee n ign oran t of t h e latter. A n d

as we ar e n ow treatin g of geographical production s , w e

deem it our duty to m ake in ciden tal m en tion of som e

Ver m i gli oli , Biogr afi a degli Scr i t tor i Per ugi n i . Perugia, 1 82 9 .

2 Razzi. Ab r a h am Or telius i n s er t ed t h ese two ch ar ts i n h is gr ea t wor k,Th ea t r um Or b is Ter r aru

'

m .

’-V. Mappa, lxxxiii. A n twerp Edition .


fam ous geographers an d historian s wh o reflected lustre on

t h e Dom in ican Order, a. few years before Dan t i’

s times .

Th e first of these i s Father Lean dro Albe rt i , a Bolognese,whom w e have quoted frequen tly . He n ot on ly describedall I taly, but h e likewise made charts of Sicily an d

Sardin ia. Nothin g could have excelled their correctness ;an d they were publi shed i n Ven ice in 1 568 , i , e. , aft er t h eauthor’s decease . These were sub sequen tly in serted byOr te lius , i n h i s far -fam ed work . Th e secon d i s Mons .

Agostino Giustin iani of Genoa, bishop of Nebbie i n

Corsica , celebrated for h i s polyglot bible an d for h i sAn n als of t h e Republic of Genoa . He m ade a secondchart of t h e aforesaid island , of which h e him self wri t esin h i s An nals, un der date 1 470. Le t us hear him .

I h ave very m i n u telydescr i b ed t h e Isla n d of Cor s ica f ort h e b en efi t of m y coun t ry. I h ave dedi ca t ed i t to Pr i n ce

A n dr ea Dor ia . I h a ve also given a descr ip t ion of i t i na di s t i n ct pa i n t i n g a n d I h ave pr esen t ed t h e wh ole to t h e

m agn ifi cen t gu i ld of S . G iorgio . This m ap, executed byGui st i n i an i , about 1 5 3 1 , was inserted by Ortelius, together with t hose by Danti an d Alberti , in h i s Theatreo f t h e Un iverse .

Gregory XIII , wh o was a most m un ifieen t patron ofarts an d sciences , n ow in vi ted Father Dan ti to t h e Etern alCity , an d appointed him to t h e distin guished position of

Pon tifical Mathematician , allowin g him to retai n , at t h e

same time , h is professorship i n t h e Un i versity of Bologna .

In fac t,our good father h ad refused t h e off ers which were

made h im by m an y of t h e reign in g sovereign s ; an d PopeGregory , after havin g h ad pe rsonal experien ce of Dan t i

'

s

m arvellous learn in g, placed t h e m ost un b oun ded con fidencein h im , an d frequently employed h i m in matt ers of t h e

greatest mom en t ; there was no favour which t h e Popewould refuse h im . Hence it was that h e em ployed him


Raffaello h ad pain ted t h e loggie of t h e Vatican — n ay,

h e h ad n o t ye t com pleted t h e design s of h i s histories ,when death deprived t h e Pon tiff of h i s services . He w as

succeeded by Dan ie l da Volterra , by Salviati , t h e

Zuccheri , an d othe r feeble pain ters . When GregoryXIII . asce n ded t h e thron e

,h i s e arn est wish was to raise

I talian ar t to im perishable glory ; an d h e m ust haveaccom plished h i s obj ect if gold could h ave cr ea t ed a r t is ts ,

or i n spi r ed t h em w i t h t r ue n ot ion s of t h e Beau t iful.Not satisfied with havi n g foun ded t h e celebrated Aca

dem y of S . Luke,h e de term in ed to con tin ue these works

which t h e celestial fan tasy of Raffaello h ad left i n t h e

Vatican Gallery ;1b ut at this period ar t h ad n o t on ly

been vitiated , but was rapidly haste n in g to rui n . Th e

pain ters whom h e in vited to carry out h i s in te n tion s ,were Niccolo C i r e ign an i , bett er kn own as Pom ar an e io ,

Loren zin o da Bologn a , Ron calli , Tem pesti , Raffaellin oda Reggie , Palm a

, then a youth , Girolam o Massei , an dGirolam o Muzian o .

2 Th e Pon tiff appoin ted Pom ar an e i o

an d Muzian o t o superin ten d these works , an d h e placedFather Dan ti over them both . An d this , says Lan zi

,

w as a very wise arran gem en t, as n othin g can b e m oreprej udicial than to leave t h e execution of such workse n tirely to t h e artists them selves ; for, in deed , there ar e

few who , i n t h e selection of subordin ate pain t ers , ar e

n ot in fluen ced by prej udices, avarice , an d j ealousies .

Th e choice of them was n ow con fided to Dan ti , w h o ,

to h i s kn ow ledge of ar t , added t h e most un blem ishedm orality ; an d thus was t h e whole w ork so adm irablydistributed , an d so well con ducted

,that t h e peace an d

I t i s thought that Dan ti built this wi n g of t h e Vatican . Gh ili n i an d

E rcolan i, t h e bishop of Perugia, wh o was a person al frien d of our architect,states this.

2 Lan z i , Stor. Pitt. Rom . Sch . Epoch 3 .

sa pr oas , AND ARCHITECT S .

quiet,if n ot t h e ge n ius , of Raffaello

’

s days seem ed t o

have re turn ed on ce m ore to t h e Vatican . I n fact ,Agostin o Taia in form s us , th at “ this in ge n ious an d

pruden t Father seem ed to have bee n sen t by God at

this precise period— n ay,h e was destin ed for t h e advan ce

m en t of t h e fi n e Arts as well as for t h e ben efit of t h eperson s professin g t h e sam e , so adm irable were h i s

predicates for such pursuits .

”l An d that t h e Vaticanm ight n ot lack som e m on um en t of t h e good Fat h er

'

s

ge n ius an d han dicraft,t h e Pope caused h im to execute

m an y charts of an cien t an d m odern Italy ; a work thatshall e tern ize t h e n am e an d fam e of this religious .

Ver m iglioli states, that these m aps were coloured between1 5 77 , an d W e thin k this t h e place to recordan other service which h e con ferred on t h e Arts , althoughit proved to b e i n som e m easure fatal to them . Am on gs tt h e boys em ployed to atten d on t h e painters

,who were

e n gaged i n t h e Vatican Gallery , there was a Neapoli tanyouth

,who

, although lost i n t h e crowd of servitors, didnot e lude t h e vigilan t eye of Dan ti . From tim e to tim e

this youth am used him self design in g an d colourin g littlefigures, which gave eviden ce of m arvellous talen t ; an d

t h e father havin g, as it were , a foresight of h i s powers ,took an opportun ity of directin g t h e Pope’s atten tion tosom e of h i s sketches , on e day that h i s Holin ess cam e toin spect t h e works which we owe to h i s m un ificen ce . Th e

Pon tiff w as aston ished by these essays,an d h e deter

m in ed that this youth should b e provided with m ean s,

till such tim e as h i s artistic education h ad been fin ished .

This y oun g Neapolitan was called Giuseppe Cesari , b u th e i s better kn ow n as t h e Cavali er e di A rp i n o. Hi s

gen ius was great , but led astray by evil m axim s an d worse

Agost. Taia, Descr izi on e del Pa lazzo Va t ican o. Loe. cit.

2 80 MEMOIRS or EMINENT Pam r s as ,

examples , b e devoted himself to m a n n er ism ,an d thus

propagat ed t h e corr uption of ar t .

Th e learn ed labours of Ign azio Danti did n ot terminatehere ; for h e h ad scarcely fin ished t h e geographical charts ,when h e began to wri t e t h e life of t h e celebrated architeet, Jacopo Barozzi da Vign ola, together with h i s

precious an n otation s on t h e work e n titled , PracticalPerspective ,

” l written by t h e sam e learn ed author. Th e

Pontiff now com m ission ed another celebrated architect,Giovan n i Fon tana, to repair t h e Claudian harbour ; an dFather Ign azio furnished all t h e design s, care fully pr eparing them accordin g to t h e ancien t rem ain s.

2 As a

reward of all these learn ed labours , Gregory XIII . b e

stowed on Father Dan ti t h e bishopric of Alatri , in t h eRoman Cam pagn a. This appointm en t was made in t h eNovem ber of 1 583 . In h i s n ew office h e com port edhim se lf in every respect, as becam e a learned an d zea

lous Pastor, atten di n g diligen tly to h i s flock, an d every

where restorin g t h e divin e worship . Havin g con vokeda Diocesan Syn od , b e abolished m an y abuses, erect eda Mont de Pie t é for t h e benefi t of t h e poor ;3 restored

l This work was published i n Rom e, 1 583 . Vign ola’

s li fe h as beenreproduced by Baldi n ucci V.

,Decen n IV., Del Secolo IV.

3 Ver m iglioli states, that F. Dan ti m ade a pr ecious collection of origin aldes ign s . by t h e m ost fam ous arch itects ; at presen twe do n ot kn ow what h asbecom e of i t .

3 I t should n ot b e forgotten that Savon arola, am on gst h is other i n n um erable good works, for which h e was ven erated b y 8 . Cather i n e de Ricci, an dS. Philip Ner i , established a Mon t de Piet“, a t Floren ce, to pro tect t h e pooragai n st t h e extortion s of Jew an d Christian usurer s. Mur ian i, i n h i s H is t oryof t h e Coun cil of Tren t, states, that a Jew ofl

'

e red t h e Floren ti n e Republicgold flor i n s, on con dition th at t h e m agistr ates would forbid t h e

erection of such a b en eficen t in stituti on . Man y of t h e in fam ous m en con

cern ed i n t h e revoltin g m ur der, or rather m artyrdom of Savon arola,were

i nsurers, or partisa n s of t h e extortion ers den oun ced b y t h e Sc r iptur es an d t h eChurch.


marble mon um en t over h i s bro t her , Vince n zo , failed toprocure fr om posterity a sin gle stone to poin t where h i srem ain s ar e m oulderin g.

Heaven gran t that t h e exemplary an d laborious life ofFather Ign azio Dan ti , m ay b e a mirror for t h e religiousof this, an d of every succeedin g age .

CHAPTER XVII.

Father Dom en ico Por t igi an i , a m ost skilful Caster i n Bron ze, an d Architect.

IT i s to us a source of in estim able delight , that we havebeen able to rescue some n am es worthy of ven erationa n d rem embran ce , from t h e destructive han ds of tim e

,

an d t h e cold n eglect of un grateful m en . These h umb le efforts of ours

,therefore , should deserve t h e appro

b at ion of every good m an who m ay have been cruellyneglected , or un j ustly oppressed durin g h i s m ortal career,for they prove that t h e gen ius of history keeps faithfulwatch over him , an d that h er ven gean ce , though itm ay appear to b e tardy, i s, n evertheless , un failin g , an d

em powered by God to eter n ize h i m i n t h e recollection ofposter ity . Such feeble ability as ours , m ay not b e able ,perhaps

,to secure perpetual fam e for those over whose

hon oured heads we would fain se t an aureole of glory ;never theless, we feel ourselves largely rem un erated , whenwe reflect that we have m ade an attem pt to do so , an d

som e such sen tim ent i s stirrin g in our heart , n ow that wear e about to wri t e of Father Dom en ico Por t igi an i .Th e m an ,

who i n h i s tim es was secon d to n one in t h edifficult ar t of castin g i n bron ze— t h e m an w h o assistedt h e celebrated sculptor, Gian Bologn a , (of whom h e ,


probably , was t h e di sciple) i n h i s man y extraordin aryworks, i n our opin ion

,was fully en titled to hon ourable

men ti on i n t h e history of Italian sculpture ; n everthelessh e h as been u n kin dly overlooked by Cicogn ara ; an d whati s worse , Baldi n ucci h as attribut ed m an y of Por t igian i

’

s

rare production s to Gian Bologn a an d h i s scholar s .

These ar e t h e m otives which have in duced m e to give a

rapid ske tch of h i s life , an d to publish t h e n otices regardi n g h i m ,

which I have fortun ately discovered i n t h e ar

chives of t h e Cathedral of Pisa, an d i n these of t h e con

ven t of S . Marco i n Floren ce .

Masteri

zan obi Por t igi an i , t h e caster i n bron ze , wast h e father of our Dom en ico , w h o saw t h e light i n 1 5 3 6 ,an d whose baptism al n am e was Bartolom m eo . I have n o t

,

however, ascert ai n ed t h e n am e of h i s n atal place , n or am

I satisfied whether it was t h e little town of San Min iatoal Tedesco , or Floren ce .

1 For som e years h e applied h imself to t h e ar t of polishin g bron zes, un der h i s father

’

s

tuition ; an d it i s on ly reason able to suppose , th at h i sparen t taught h im to design an d to m odel i n clay . Duri n g these first e ssays , h e n ever n eglected t h e study of le tters , i n which h e m ade con siderable progress , so m uchso, that after havin g acquired a kn owledge of Latin ity ,h e determ in ed to dedicate him self t o God i n v t h e holymin istry . On t h e 5 t h ofAugust, 1 55 2 , h e was in vest edwith t h e Dom in ican habit

,by Father Vin cen zo Ercolan i

of Peru gia, i n t h e con ven t of S .Mar co . At this period Port igi an i h ad n ot reached h i s seven te en th year ; an d on bein greceived am on g t h e re ligious of t h e choir , h e took t h e n am e

of Dom en ico . It appears certain,that after receivin g t h e

habit, h e se t out for t h e con ven t of S . Dom en ico i n Pi stoj a , to m ake h i s n ovitiate ; an d that h e w as professed

‘In a con tract between t h e superi n ten den ts of t h e Duom o of Pisa an d Port igian i , t h e latter i s called a Floren tin e.


there by Father Lodovico Buon i n segn i , t h e sub ~Pr ior of

said conven t, August 1 4th ,When Por t igi an i reached Pi st oja , Fr a Paolin o Signo

r acci h ad been some tim e dead , an d h e was t h e lastof that glorious lin e of pain ters belon gin g to t h e congre

gat ion of S . Marco . Plautilla Nelli , t h e Domin icanpaintress, however, was still livin g in Floren ce , an d at

this pe riod m ay b e said to have been i n t h e bloom of wo

m anhood. I have always rem arked , that those gift edwith good disposition an d n atural ability, who have takent h e religious habit , in fluen ced by pure an d holy m otives,ar e always sure to m ake t h e calm peacefuln ess of t h ecloister subserve som e grand purpose , an d that m en of

this stamp ar e wont to apply them selves to some usefulpursuit, an d to labour thereat till they fin ally distin guishthem selves ; thus , at on e an d t h e same tim e , reflectinghon our on their private lives, an d on t h e religion whichthey profess. Were I to e n umerate all t h e members of ourOrderwh o h ave devoted them selves to mechanical pursuits,it i s not material that I would require but tim e . Of these ,however, was Fathe r Dom enico Por t igian i , w h o , becausenature h ad n ot gifted him with ability for t h e studyof Ecclesiastical Scien ces, devo t ed himself to that of t h earts of design ,

for which h e h ad t h e m ost decided aptitude . Mean while , however, h e h ad m ade him self t h eroughly acquai n ted with t h e architectur al works of Vit ruvius , an d Leon Battista Alberti , t h e gran dest m aste rsof this m ost noble ar t ; an d , indeed , i n a very i n con siderable tim e , h e m ade such proficiency , that h e was able t osuperin ten d t h e con str uction of various buildi n gs for t h er eligion s i n Florence an d Fi esole .

3 Resumin g from time

‘Gori an d Richa erred when statin g that Por t igian i was a lay br other.A n n a! Con v. S . Marci de Flor en tia. Th is Fa th er , i n h is a vocad os of

Ar ch it ect , r es tor ed m an y edifi ces wh ich wer e eit h er des tr oyed or i n a r ui n ous


s t an t ly em ployed by t h e Gran d Duke i n m an y an d i m

portan t works of this sort, h e freque n tly en gaged t h e

services of Por t igi an i . Now it so happen ed that t h eSalviati fam ily, after havin g obtained from t h e Fathersof S . Marco t h e juspa t r on a tus of t h e altar of S . Dom in ic

,

ben eath which was laid t h e un corrupted body of S .

An ton io , Archbishop ofF loren ce , dete rm in ed to erect amagn ificen t chapel , an d there deposit t h e m ortal relics oft h e sain t . For this purpose t h e Salviati in vite d t h e

m ost distin guished artists of Floren ce to com e an d devot eall the ir pow ers to t h e decoration of t h e chapel . Pain ters ,sculptors , architects, an d bron ze casters w ere sum m on edto this work ; an d t h e m un ificen ee of t h e Salviati wassuch as m ight have bee n worthy of a great m onarch , as

they expen ded e ighty thousan d dollars on t h e con struetion an d orn am e n tation of t h e chapel . Gian Bologn awas appoin ted to direct all t h e works , an d t h e chapel wasbuilt afte r h i s design : h e also rebuilt t h e church . Ales

san dro Allori , called i l B r on zi n o, was selected to pain t

t h e cupola an d t h e gran d altar-piece . Th e two lat eralpain tin gs were coloured by Fran cesco Mor an di n i da

Poppi,an d Batti sta Naldin i of Flor en ce f wh ilst Passig

n an o was e n gaged to execute t h e t wo gran d historicalfrescos i n t h e vestibule . Of t h e six statues , on e was

sculptured by Gian Bologna him self,an d t h e rest by

h i s pupils . All t h e works i n bron ze were en trusted t oFather Dom en ico Por t igi an i .Th e first care of Gian Bologn a was to prepare a

splen did u r n for t h e body of t h e Sain t ; an d it was dete rm in ed that t h e m ate ri al of this should b e black orien talm arble , an d that t h e recum bent figure (life-size) of t h eholy Archbishop should b e executed i n bron ze , an d

laid upon i t. Gian Bologn a furn ished t h e design ; an d

Por t igi an i made t h e cas t. This work was execut ed with


t h e greatest diligen ce possible , an d n othin g could haveexceeded t h e beautiful m odellin g of t h e head , or t h e highpoli sh which Por t igi an i gave to t h e whole com position .

Over t h e six statues which adorn t h e chapel , wereplaced si x histories executed i n bron ze . These basreliefswere i n he ight very n early two an d a half braccia , an d i nw idth little less than a braccio an d a half. Beautiful aswas t h e design by Gian Bologn a, it did n ot exce lPor t igi an i

’

s workm an ship . Th e first history , which isover t h e statue of S . John Baptist , represen ts S . An ton in o preachin g to t h e Floren tin es . Th e secon d , over t h estatue of S . Philip , t h e Apostle , descri b es S . An ton in oen terin g Flore n ce after h e h ad been created Archbishop .

Th e passage of t h e sain t’s history chosen by t h e artist, i sthat which tells us how t h e Sain t cam e in to t h e city

,

barefooted , an d accom pan ied by t h e m agistrates an d

clergy . In t h e third , over t h e statue of S . Thomas ofAquin o , we behold t h e Archbishop resuscitatin g a deadchild . In t h e fourth , which i s over t h e statue of S .

Edward ofEn glan d , h e represen ts S .An t on i n o distributin galm s to t h e poor . Th e fifth , which i s over t h e statue ofS . Dom in ic , exhibits S .An ton in o rece ivin g t h e habit of aPreachin g-Friar ; an d , fin ally , t h e sixth , over t h e statueof S . An ton io , Abbot, represen ts t h e holy Archbishopabsolvin g t h e Floren tin e m agistrates from t h e ecclesiastical cen sures i n which they in volved them selves byviolatin g t h e jurisdiction of t h e church . In t h e in teriorfacade of t h e chapel , h e executed three highly-fi n i sh edbron ze statues. These ar e three an gels

,on e of whom

’

i s stan din g i n t h e cen tre , while t h e other two ar e

seated at e ither side . He also cast two bron ze can delabra , which were placed before t h e sain t’s altar , t h e :

m en sa (table) of which h e executed in metal , adornedwith t h e m ost faultless arabesques.


Thus was t h e beaute ous chapel built an d decorated ;an d thus did Por t igian i

’

s name acquire celebrity . In deed ,Father Ser afi n o Razzi tells us that “ t h e Gr a n d Dulce

would h ave given Por t igian i a pen s ion h ad h e b een d is

posed to devote h im self to t h i s pr ofess ion ; an d h e ( t h e

D uke) would h aveplaced som e you t h s un der t h e Fa t h er

t h a t t h ey m igh t lear n t h e a r t of cas t i n g i n b r on ze fr om

h i m . Bu t Por t igian i , r egar di n g t h is as a t va r ian ce w i t h

h is r eligious voca t ion , would h ave a b an don ed t h e ar t afterh e h adfin is h ed t h e wor ks i n t h e ch apel of S . A n ton i n o, ifh e h ad n ot b een b oun d by ob ed i en ce to cult iva t e t h e a r t .

Th i s good Fa t h er h as n ow passed h is fift i et h gear , a n di s confessor i n t h e m on as t ery of S . Dom i n ic i n Flor en ce.

He h as a b r ot h er n am edHi er on im o, wh o is employed as a n

en gi n eer i n t h e ser vice of t h e D ulce of Savoy.

”l To thisim portan t authority we will subj oin that of t h e con tin uat or of t h e An n als of t h e con ven t of S . Marco

,who

records that t h e Kin g of E thiopia h ad applied to t h eGrand Duke of Tuscan y, requestin g him to send someon e well skilled i n b r on ze icas t i n g t o that di stan t region

,

in order that t h e youths of that country might learn thisar t HadPor t igi an i ,

” quoth t h e An n alist, “ con sented ,h e would have got t h e appointm en t in preferen ce t o all

h i s Florentine com pe titors .

”2 But t h e bron ze gates of

t h e Cathedral of Pisa, m ay b e regarded as t h e grandestwork by Por t igi an i ; an d of a certainty they shall eternize h i s name . He , however , at t h e time of h i s death ,left them half fin ished ; an d it i s t o b e regrett ed that h ewas n ot Spared t o perfect them . Of this stupendouswork

,concern ing which Morrone (t h e author of Pisa

Illust r at e) h ad n ot very accurate information , we willn ow speak at some length , on t h e authority of t h e docu

l Razzi, Istoria degli Uom i n i Illustr i. An n al S . Marci .


died about t h e beginnin g of that year , could n ot haveleft t h e gat es half finished as h e really did .

1 In fact, asearly as 1 596 , we fi n d that various sum s were paid to thisFather on account of t h e gates of t h e cathedr al ;2 an d

we conclude from a lett er written b y Giovan n i BattistaCresci , dated Novem b er 3 0, of t h e same year

,that Por

t igian i , as it were to give a specim en of h i s workmanship , was already elaboratin g a hist ory an d som e ornamen tation s for said gates. Here ar e h i s words :t en everFa t h erPor t igian i n eeds m on ey,youw i llpayh im

as h e m ay desi r e ; a n d I , f or m ypar t , h ave t en der ed h im

som e a lr eady. You a r e n ow awa r e t h a t a ll t h e a r r a n ge

m en ts h ave b een complet ed , an d t h e d im en sion s of t h e ga tesh ave b een det er m i n ed . We would h ope t h a t you ar e

pleased w i t h t h e or n am en ta t ion , as well as w i t h t h e d is t r i

b ut ion of t h e wor k. Sh ould t h eLor d gr an t t h em life a n dh ealt h , t h ey w i llpr oduce a wor k calcula t ed t o as ton ish everyon e i n a ll t h a t r ega r ds or der , m ys ter i es , subjects , a n d wor km an sh ip . If you could n ow on ly see t h e pi ct ur e t h eyh ave

fi n ish ed , i t would appear to b e qui te a dif er en t t h i n g.

”3

Th e con tract between t h e superin ten dents of t h e workan d Father Por t i gi an i , was sign ed i n Pisa, on t h e 2 2 n dof April , 1 597 , accordin g t o t h e an cien t Pisan comput at i on . Th i s valuable an d unpublished record , which wediscovered i n t h e archives of t h e cathedral , shall b e givenamon gst t h e docum en t s .

4 From i t we learn that Port i

gi an i was comm issioned to cast t h e three gat es , toge ther

1 Pisa Illustrata.

2 Jun e 6, 1 596, Por t igi n i ackn owledges to have rece ived 2 50 dollar s on

accoun t of t h e gates wh ich wer e b ei n g cas t f or th e ca th edr al. There i s alsoan other ackn owledgm en t

, dat edJuly 2 3 , 1 59 6 ; an d t h e receipts dat ed i n t h esubsequen t year s ar e so n um erous, that we feel ourselves obliged to om itthem .

3 Mon um en ts Restaurat ion is Pi s. Prim atial. Ecclesi se .

V. Docum en t at t h e en d of this vol.


with all their histories an d ornamen tation s accor d i n g to

t h e wax m odels execu t ed on wood , wh ich h ave b een con

s ign ed to sa id Fa t h er which m odels “wer e to b epr oduced

by excellen t m as ter s , a n d so w r ough t as t o m er i t t h e

appr ob a t ion of Messr s . Gio. Bologn a a n d Raf aello diPagn o, t h e a r ch i t ect .

” We will n ow en um erate t h e con

di t ion s by whichPor t igi an i boun d himself to t h e super i nt en den t s of t h e cathedral . In t h e first place , Por t igi an ipledged him se lf to ass is t per son ally i n set t i n g up sa i d

ga tes as soon as t h ey h ad b een fin ish ed . Secon dly, t h esuperin ten den ts of t h e works were obliged to provide himwit h som e place i n Floren ce where h e could conven ien tlym ake t h e castings ; an d they were also boun d to furnishh i m with all t h e m etal necessary for said gates , an d to

a llow h im t en per cen t . f or t h e was te ; thirdly, t h e wh olewor kwas t o b efin ish ed a n d polish ed i n t h e m os t excellen t

s tyle ; an d i n case of an y di ff eren ce betwee n Por t igi an ian d t h e superin ten den ts , Gian Bologn a an d Raffaello diPaguo were appoin ted to act as arbitrat ors . Fourthly

, t h e

superintenden ts agreed t o pay Father Por t igi an i for t h ecastin g of said bron ze gates dolla r s ; an d 50 dolla r s

per m on t h f or t h e n ex t six m on t h s , aft er t h e expi r a t ion ofwh ich h e s h a ll r eceive a sum pr opor t ion a te to t h e wor k

wh i ch h e execu t es da i ly. Fi f t h ly, t h e superin t en dentsstipulated t o di scharge all claim s that Por t igi an i mighthave on them , as soon as h e delivered t h e th ree gate si n a perfect s t a te t o sa id super i n t en den ts i n Flor en ce, i . e.

after t h e exp i r a t ion of two year s , com m en ci n g on t h e ls t

of !

May of t h e cur r en t yea r , Finally, Por t igi an i an d h i sn ephew , Zan obi di Girolamo Por t igian i , subscribed thesecon di tion s , an d pledged them selves to t h e observan cethereof. This valuable docum en t will n ot leave u s to

question whether a part or t h e whole of this adm irablew ork was con fided to Por t igi an i ; an d , furthermore , t h e


Chron i cle of S . Marco distin ctly tells us “t h a t h e elab o

r a t ed t h e i mpos ts a n d t h r esh olds of t h e t h r ee ga tes , a n dalso of t h epr i n cipalga t e of t h e Pisan ca t h edr al wi t h m os t

s i n gula r shri ll.”l Th e Zan obi Por t igi an i men ti oned in

t h e con tract , was t h e n ephew an d pupil of Father Portigian i , whom h e assisted i n castin g t h e gates ; an d it wouldappear that t h e former fin ished them aft er h i s uncle’sdeath . Neither should we forget to m en tion a certainAgnolo , who , accordin g to Mor r on a, was called Serrano ,an d was employed t o help Por t igian i at this marvellouswork .

Aided by these two young m en t h e religious of S .

Marco commenced t h e laborious task of poli shi n g t h e

Three Gates ; an d l have discovered in t h e archivesof t h e cathedral , ackn owledgm ents of various sum s

given t o Por t igian i , on accoun t of same .

2 Notw i t h st an d

i n g all t h e an xieties an d in cessan t toil of t h e ReverendAr t ificer , h e was n ot able to fin ish t h e work within t h etime Specified by t h e contr act ; for h e h ad n ow overpassed h i s eightieth year , an d though h i s health was

very variable , h e h ad on ly t h e two youn g m en t o helphim . Hi s contin ual occupati on about t h e furnace , an d

unin t errupted application t o this most in salubrious sort ofwork soonbrought on a grievous m alady,wh i ch , af ter averyshort per iod , caused h i s death . A lett er dat ed Floren ce ,February 3 rd , 1 601 , an d addressed by Father Guidi , aDomi n ican Friar

, t o t h e Superintendents of t h e Cathe

Pisa Illustr ata.

These receipts m ake altogether 3 4, an d they were si gn ed be tween 1 596

an d 1 601 , we subjoin two of them .

“ I Fr a Dom . Par t igian i h ave r eceived

f r om M. Jacob i , th e pr ovider s, two th ousa n d poun ds of t in , deliver ed to m e a;th ef oun dr y by or der of th e over seer s .

" An other is of t h e followi n g ten orFran cesco di San t o Regolo pay Giovan n i Procaccio 8 lire for t h e carriage

o f t h e m odels of t h e gat es which were sen t to Flor en ce for Father Por t igian i ,e t c—Horatio Ron cion i

,P ietro Mar acci

,

”et c.


t h e work an d expedi te it with all possible diligen ce ;this i s all that I have to com municate at presen t.” Two

days after t h e date of this lette r Father Por t igi an i passedou t of this life : that i s to say, on t h e 5 t h of February ,1 601 , i n t h e sixty-fi f t h vear of h i s age , an d fiftieth of h i s

cloister life . l It would appear that t h e fin ishin g of t h e

gates was suspen ded for about a year after h i s dem ise ;but it i s quite certain that t h e superin t en den t s of t h e

cat h edr aldeput ed t h eFloren tine Scu lptor,An t on io Sus ini ,t o estim ate t h e work which Por t igi an i h ad executed .

This occurred on t h e 2 4t h of Jan uary , 1 602 ; an d t h e

Dom in ican s of t h e Conven t of S . Marco,Floren ce , em

ployed an artist who h ad their con fiden ce to att en d fort h e sam e purpose . Susini chose as h i s colleague i n thisbusin ess Pietro Tacca, t h e Sculptor , who was a discipleof Gian Bologna, an d in deed t h e for m er was well ao

qua i n t ed wi t h wh a t h ad b een don e as h e h ad suppli ed

t h e m odels . Bu t le t us hear Susin i2 con cern in g t h e r e

sul t of this valuation ! “ Havi n g m et , t h ey ( t h e deput ies)r ead t h e i n ven tory of all t h e cas t i n gs m ade b yFr a DO

m en i co, as well as of t h e h is tor ies , fr i ezes , cor n i ces , m odels

i n wax a n d clay, an d t h ey t h en decla r ed t h a t Fr a Dom en

i co h ad left t h e ga t es h alffin i sh ed , an d t h a t i t was t h ei r

du ty t o con s ider wh a t am oun t of m on ey h e h ad disb ur sed

f or sa id m odels i n wax ,as well as wh a t h ad b een expen ded

by t h e super i n t en den ts on t h e h is tor ies after Por t igia n i’

s

dem ise, t h a t t h ey m igh t t h us squa r e t h ei r accoun t s a n d

i n dem n ify each ot h er A n d , i n deed , i t was

on lyfa i r t h a t t h e h ei r s of sa id fa t h er sh ould n ot sus ta i n

a n y loss .

It i s perfectly certain that t h e gates cast by Ghiberti ,

1 V. Docum en t.Le t t e r s di An t . Susi n i (Jan . 2 4

,1 602 )—M0 1m m en ta Res t. Pr im a t ia li s


for t h e Church of S . Giovan n i i n Floren ce , ar e by fart h e gran de st that have ever com e fr om t h e han ds of m an ;

an d it i s equally certain that these of t h e Cathedral ofPisa , ar e excelled by non e save these which Michelan giolo pron oun ced to b e fit for t h e portal of Heaven .

Th e prin cipal gate cast by Por t igian i i s twelve bracciahigh , by six wide ; t h e height of t h e two lateral ones i seight an d a half braccia

, an d their width four an d twothirds . A beautiful m oulding

,adm irably cast , consistin g

of leaves , fruits, an d flowers i n which nature i s mosthappily im itated , divides each of t h e imposts in to fourcom partmen ts ; on these ar e represen ted t h e prin cipalmysteries of t h e life of t h e Blessed Virgin , an d of thatof our Redeem er . Th e attitudes of t h e figures ar e welldefin ed , t h e drapery i s m ost perfect , an d som e of t h e

figures seem to detach them selves from t h e groun d . Th e

ornam en tation s con tain various emblem s relatin g t o t h e

histories . On t h e friezes ar e various prophets an d saints,whose movem ents an d extremities partake of Michelan giolo

’

s grave style . There ar e also various h i er oglyphios with appropriate epigraphs ; each of t h e twolateral gates h as a sim ilar mouldin g dividin g t h e im postsin to three compart m en ts. Th e im posts of both represen tpassages of t h e life an d passion of t h e Saviour ; an d on

t h e lintels an d an gles ar e e ight figur es of sain ts. On e

does n ot n eed m uch con n oisseurship i n order to perceive .

h ow thoroughly Por t igi an i was Skilled in this ar t , or

how beautifully h e h as cast an d polished these threegates, which con stitute t h e gran dest orn ament of thissplen did cathedral .Here e n d our n otices ofPor t igi an i . Th e continuator of

t h e an n als of t h e Con ven t of S . Marco lauds h i s pruden cean d piety, an d tells us that h e was successively m aster ofnovices, con fessor to t h e nuns of t h e Order , an d subprior


in t h e convent of S . Marco , as well as in others of thatcongregation . No on e of h i s Institute succeeded him int h e ar t of castin g in bronze . Indeed t h e DominicanSculp tors m ay b e said t o have formed an illustrioustrium virate , gran der than which i s not to b e found i n t h eann als of Art. Fr a Gugli eh n o Agnelli was most dist in

gui sh ed as a statuary ; Fr a Damiano da Bergamo wasassuredly t h e most fam ous of all t h e carve rs i n wood ; an dafter Gian Bologn a , who is it that h as excelled Fr a Dom enico Por t igian i as a caster in bronze ?

CHAPTER XVIII .

Father Dom en i co Pagan elli of Faen za, Ar chi t ect an d Civil En gin eer.

IF we b e greatly in debted to those whose pencils an d

Ch i sels have furn ished us with subli m e an d holy lessons ;an d if we ar e boun d to laud an d venerate those artistswho cat er to our delight , by im itatin g t h e varied beauties of natur e on t h e can vas or in marble , it must b eadmitt ed , that those who applied them selves to t h e

study of C ivi l an d military arch i tecture , have still stron gerclaims on our grat itude an d admiration . There ar e

man y scien ces in which a m an m ay b e highly useful toSociety at large ; but as far as t h e requirem en ts of one ’scountry ar e con cern ed , noth i n g can b e more im portantthan a profoun d kn ow ledge of civil an d m ilitary architecture , an d particularly of that bran ch kn ow n as b y

dr aulics. Hen ce it i s, that Fran ce cherishes t h e memoryof Crapon n e an d Riquet ; whilst Italy con secrates t h enam es of Fr a Giocondo an d Lionardo da Vinci . Not


fasting , an d readin g , as became a truly good re ligious .

He studied i n t h e conven t of Bologn a, an d h e preachedwith great ben efit to t h e faithful i n m an y of t h e con ven tsof our In stit ute . He was very often elect ed to t h e

dign ity of Prior ; but havin g obtain ed perm iss ion fromh i s superiors, h e removed to Rom e— that sanct uary an d

asylum of arts an d lett ers— i n t h e year of our Lord ,1 585 . Here h i s abilities an d virtues soon secured forh im t h e patron age of Cardin al Alessan dr in o , then on e of

t h e most di stin guished m em ber s of t h e sacred college .

This Cardin al w as greatly beloved , because h e was t h e

nephew of Pius V . ; an d Paganelli , during t h e thirteenyears which h e spen t i n h i s ser vice , gave him t h e

greate st satisfaction . In fact, t h e Cardin al took specialpleasure i n em ployin g h i m as h i s archit ect , (a sciencewhich h e still practises

,an d of which h e i s perfect maste r,)

so much so , that h e com m ission ed him to build a palacei n Rome , on which h i s Em in en ce expen ded about sixtythousan d dollars. This work succeeded t o t h e Cardin al’s

great delight ; an d as it was a n oble specim en of ourfr iar’s skill an d tas te , h i s Eminen ce , when dying , b e

queat h ed h im a pension of a hundr ed dollars , as remun eration for all h i s toil. Owing to t h e same Cardinal , an dh i s ow n virtues an d abilities , h e received t h e degree of

Master of Sacred Theology i n Rome ; an d , indeed , thiswas a dign ity to which h e was justly e n titled. Nor

should it b e forgotten that h e gain ed t h e esteem of manyother Cardin als , Prin ces, an d Rom an Barons. He was

m ost in tim at e with Pope In nocent IX.,who gave him a

Can onry, then vacan t i n t h e cathedr al of Fae'

n za, whichh e con ferred on h i s brother Vincenzo . In fact, t hisPope would have done m uch more for h i m if h e h ad n o t

been t oo soon tran slat ed from this tran sitory scen e t o t h ee verlastin g life . He also was familiar with Cardin al


Alessandr o de ’ Medici , who was afterwards Pope Le oXI , an d who appoin ted h im h i s archit ect. This Pon tiffwould have don e m uch for h im if h e h ad lived lon ger .Nevertheless

,when dyin g, h e gave h im a pen sion of a

hun dred dollars. Th i s Father Dom en ico i s still li vin gi n Rom e , where h e practises architecture . He i s such a

perfect m aster of this ar t , that man y of t h e Car din alsan d other Prin ces an d Rom an Baron s , give him constan tem ploym en t. He i s n ow sixty-on e years of age , an d h eh as gain ed t h e respect an d con fiden ce of t h e Cardin alsan d Rom an Baron s.

”

From th i s un published mem oir , we con clude that i t san on ymous author com posed it i n t h e year 1 606 . Ton

duzzi,an d t h e other writers of Faen za, w ill furn ish us

with m att er to supply t h e void left by t h e an on ym ous ,i n t h e life of Pagan elli ; an d we wi ll thus b e able t o

con tin ue it through t h e e ighteen years that h e survived .

Like t h e celebrated Fr a Giocon do an d Father Ign azioDanti , this religious cultivated a variety of sacred an d

profane studi es. He was reputed on e of t h e m ost di st i n gui sh ed mathematician s of whom Rome could b east i nt h e seven teen th cen tury . Nor was h e less celebrated forh i s kn owledge of di vin ity an d dexterity i n t h e m an agem ent of t h e most com plicat ed affairs. In deed such wast h e high opin ion of h i s pruden ce

,at a period when Rome

possessed a great n um ber of t h e most celebrated Th eologians an dCan on ists, that Pagan e lli was on e of t h e few wh ocomposed t h e con gregation in st ituted for t h e form ationof t h e clergy— a reform ation which was in sisted on by t h eCouncil of Tren t , an d t h e n ecessities of t h e tim es. Nor

should w e omit to men tion , that when Clem en t VIII , ac

com panied by h i s court , repai red to Ferr ara, (which , atthis pe riod , h ad been added to t h ePon tifical territory ,) i nt h e year 1 598, Father Paganelli was appointed to act as


Mas ter of t h e Sacred Palace , till h is Holin ess’

s return .

‘

But le t us speak of t h e most importan t of these works ,which entitle t h e good an d learn ed Father t o our gratitude . This i s t h e magn ificent Fountain wh i ch h e

con structed in h i s nat ive city , to t h e inestimable benefitof t h e in habitan ts , as well as t h e adorn m en t of Faen zaitself. In deed , t h e hi stor ian s of t h e latter place havewritt en very m in utely of this Foun tain , narratin g , at t h esame tim e , t h e causes which led to t h e erection of t h esam e beautiful an d useful obj ect .

2 Ton duzzi an d Scaletta ,both con tem poraries of Paganelli , will furn ish us witht h e opportun e notices.

In t h e year 1 567 , when Mon t avalen t e was president oft h e provin ce of Rom agn a , t h e magistrates of Faen za det e r m i n ed to supply t h e people of that city with potablew ater , of whi ch there was then great dearth ; but suchwas t h e diversity of opin ion regardin g ways an d m ean s,

that all these magisterial de liberations produced no result.When ,

however, Cardi nal Guido Ferrerie da Vercelli , a

m an who h ad t h e int erests of t h e people at heart,suc

ceeded Mon t avalen t e , h e resolved t o ai d t h e magist rate s,n ay, an d to stim ulate them whenever it might b e n eces

sary. For this purpose , therefore , said Cardi n al conveneda meetin g i n t h e year 1 583 , an d urged t h e magistr at es toproceed with t h e work of t h e fountain , statin g at t h e samet ime , that it should b e en trusted to Father Pagane lli

, t h e

distin guished architect an d e n gineer, who was the ir fellowcitizen , an d then actually i n t h e service of t h e Pepe .

Th e Cardi n al’s suggestion havin g been adopted , FatherPagan elli was sen t for to Rom e , an d on h i s arri val i nFaen za , t h e authorities comm issioned him to report , as t o

Clem en t VI II. left Rom e, April 1 2 , 1 598, an d did n ot return tillDecem ber of t h e sam e year.

Ton duzzi .

302 MEMOIRS or EMINENT PAINTERS .

t h e Legatine office by Paul V., (A.D . t h e works

w ere vigorously forwarded , an d speedily advanced t o perfect ion . Need we say, that this remarkable un dertaki ngreflected great honour on Pagan elli , or th at it gave satisfaction to t h e citizen s ? Le t us n ow hear Scaletta, on e

of t h e deputies, describin g how t h e Engineer, aecom

pli sh ed h i s task .

Th e architect’s first care , in t h e con st ruction of thisfabric , was to visit atten tively all t h e sit es i n t h e n eighb our h ood of t h e city, particularly i n t h e southern quarte r,from which all t h e wate rs that irrigat e t h e te rritory come ,in order t o ascertai n wh i ch of them was best sui t ed t ohold water enough for said foun tain : an d having pitchedon a spot about two m iles an d a-half south of t h e C ity

,in

a place called Orvella, not far from t h e high road thatleads to Brisighella , h e declared it to b e an excellentsi te wherein to form a reservoir for receivi n g all t h e

streams of t h e neighbouring hills , which were quit e suf

fici en t to give an unfailin g supply t o said fountain .

Moreover , t h e level character of t h e soil greatly facilit ated t h e conveyance of t h e water , an d indeed there wasno necessity of carrying t h e duct over can als or rivers ,an d this greatly lessen ed t h e difficulties our E n gineerh ad to en coun ter. Aft er repeat ed experimen ts , h e fin allysati sfied him self that this was t h e most e ligible site . Hereh e caused a well of great depth to b e dug, in order t ocollect as much water as would give a perpetual supplyto t h e foun tain . In fact all t h e streamlets of t h e neighb our i n g hills flow in to this well , an d when t h e m ass of

t h e water i s sufficien t , it n aturally rises an d passes throughvarious open in gs into an other receptacle , wh ich i s calledt h e first basin . Here com men ces t h e gran d duct throughwhich t h e water i s conveyed into t h e public piazza of t h e


city,where it forms these m imic cataracts, so worthy of

t h e bizarre gen ius of t h e artist.” 1

Havin g succeeded , our en gin eer’

s n ext thoughtwas, h owh e should best main tain a perpetual supply of wate r , an dcom pe n sate for all losses. This h e effected with thatclevern ess an d inven tive skill which ar e t h e predicates ofevery m an wh o i s thoroughly con versant with h i s ar t .

Th e most learned architects an d en gin eers have not failedto com m en d Father Pagan elli

’

s work , an d tim e that dealsso un sparin gly wi th all that t h e han d of m an produces ,h as se t t h e seal of i t s approbation on this structure , wh i chi s of such vast utility to t h e city of Faen za. If t h e en

gi n eer h as thus shown him self to b e in tim ately conversan t w ith hydr aulics , h e h as also proved that h e was n ot

less skilful i n t h e design of t h e foun tain ,which , though

i t s dim en sion s b e n ot great , i s n evertheless extrem elye legan t. It m ay b e described thus : En closed within an

iron raili n g, ar e three great lion s, (t h e arm orial devices

of t h e city ,) an d sun dr y eagles an d dragon s cast inbronze , from t h e m ouths of which , (as well as fr omother parts of their bodi es) , t h e water Spirts up in je ts ,an d then falls in to a m arble basin below ,

which alsoreceives t h e m an y mim ic stream s that rise an d descen dthrough a leaden pipe , which i s placed i n t h e centre of

an upper basin . Outside t h e iron railin g, a n d oppositeto each other ar e two sm aller foun tain s

,each of which

i s furn ished with a m arble reservoir for t h e use of t h e

citizen s . This won derful work , accordi ng to Righ i , wasn ot fin ished tillIt i s very likely that Paganelli m ade repeated jour n i esfrom Rom e to h i s n ative city , while this work was in pr o~

gress ; for , indeed , our en gin eer desired to close h i sdays in h i s natal place . He therefore fixed h i s abode i n

Scaletta, II Fon te di Faen za.2 A n n a! . di Faen za.


Faenza , a n d expen ded a ll t h e m on ey h e h ad r eceived fr omPopes , Car di n als , a n d Rom a n pr i n ces on t h e er ect ion ofm an y fa b r i cs , an d on t h e r eb ui ldi n g an d en lar gem en t oft h e con ven t of S . A n dr ea , of wh i ch h e was a m em b er ;

a n d a n a n ci en t i n scr ip t ion‘ would lead us to b elieve

t h a t h e r eb u i lt sai d con ven t fr om t h e very foun da t ion s .

Magn an i inform s us, that t h e choir of t h e church wasrest ored by Paganelli , an d that t h e chapel del Rosariowas decorated accordin g to h i s designs. Bei n g wh olly de

voted to t h ewelf a r e of h is Or der , h e la id ou t all t h e m on ey

pa i d h im by t h e ci t izen s of Faen za f or t h e foun ta i n , ont h epur ch ase of a vi lla

, wh ich h e b equea t h ed to h is con ven t .

Th e people of Forli , havin g requested him t o fum ish a

design for a chapel in their cathedral ; h e readi ly acquiesced , an d accordin g to Paolo Bon oli , produced t h e planof t h e beaut iful Chapel (in t h e Corin thian order) calledLa Madon n a delFuoco.

2 This chapel was wisely pr eser ved

,at t h e period when t h e cathedral was thrown

down,for indeed it would have been difficult to erect an y

thin g of t h e sort , richer or m ore e legan t .Havin g now attain ed h i s seventy-n in th year , FatherPaganelli passed in to e ternal rest on t h e 2 3 r d of March ,1 62 4 . Th e community of S . An drea, am on gst whomh e drew h i s last breath , desiring to com mem orate t h e

many an d importan t services which h e h ad renderedthem ,

rai sed an affectionat e mon ument t o h i m in t h e

first cloister of their con vent. This m onumen t i s decorat ed with h i s bust, modelled i n clay, an d represen ts h imwearing t h e insign ia of a doctor , an d holdi ng a scroll i n

Hoe. D . An dr eas Coen ob ium af un dam en t is ext r acto, etc.3 History of Forli, ad. an . 1 6 1 9 . Th e b ui ldi ng wh ich excelled all th e

o th er s we h ave m en t ion ed, was th a t wh i ch was com m en ced i n th is year , n am ely,t h e ch apel of th e Madon n a del Fuoco (of th e Fi r e) . I t was h igh ly decor atedwi t h gold, si lver , an d m a r b les , a n d i t was design ed by th e Dom i n ican Fat h er ,

Pagan elli , wh owas th ePope’

s ar ch i tect."


CHAPTER XIX .

Father Giovan n i Battista Mayn e, t h e Span ish Pain ter, an d Father JeanAn dre, a Fren ch Pai n ter.

THE seven teen th cen tury , so fatal to t h e arts , li t erature ,an d m orals of t h e Italian s, beheld all t h e tradition s ofChristian Art fadin g away on e after t h e other , an d thatsam e cen tury witn essed t h e apostacy of pain tin g , which ;aft er havin g abjured i t s high an d holy office of civil an dreligious in structress , then ceforth sought to derive i t sinspiration s from t h e Pagan Olympus. Then , in deed , itseem ed as though t h e gen erality of artists h ad no earthlyhom e , an d cared little for that which i s “ beyon d t h eskies.

”

An d,i n fact, n othin g can b e m ore absurd than t o

attem pt t o develope religious subjects on can vas or i n

marble , if t h e pain ter an d sculptor b e not solicitous torealise t h e gran d object of Christian Art , or if t h e resultof h i s labours b e at varian ce with it. Surely we ar e notboun d to recogn ise certain figures as apostles or eremit es,sim ply because t h e artist m ay have draped them in sergeor i n t h e skin of t h e wild beast. Far otherwise , we willn ever give such design ation to t h e former , till we beholdthe ir features beam in g with t h e supern al brightn ess of

that charity whi ch made them t h e j oy an d t h e blessin gof m an kin d ; an d as to t h e latter , we will n ever pro ~

n oun ce them to b e what t h e pain ter or sculptor wouldhave us believe , till we can read on their counten an ces t h eecstacy of souls whose devotion raises them above thistran sitory scene , thus associatin g them by an ticipationwith t h e choirs of t h e elect. Havin g fallen from such an

altitude , i t was on ly from time to tim e that pain tingdeigned to bestow a hasty an d furtive glan ce on these


cloisters , where it h ad foun d i t s earliest refuge , an d wherei t s in fan cy was n ursed , an d from which it went forth i nall t h e splen dour of m aturity . IVh er efor e , as this perioddates t h e extinction of t h e lon g lin e of Dom in icanpain ters i n Italy , we m ust needs leave our own sun n yshores an d travel in to distan t regions , i n order to fill upt h e void which that ill-om en ed cen tury h as caused i n ourar tistic h i story.

l

Spain presen ts to us, in t h e person of Father GiovanniBattista Mayn o , a pain ter whose m erits entitle h i m t o a

distin guished niche i n t h e pin acoteca of our artist s . Had

we been able to collect m ore copious n otices of him ,

we would have en deavoured to make our readers betteracquainted with this Dom in ican ; but we m ust con te n tourselves with these few facts which have been given byt h e Marquis Mon tecuccoli , wh o h as recen tly published a

brief but well writte n h i story of Span ish pain tin g .

2

Among t h e man y di stin guished di scipleswhom Dome

We should n ot b e un derstood as sayin g, that n o Dom in ican cultivatedpai n ti n g in Italy duri n g t h e seven teen th or eighteen th cen tur ies, b ut ratherthat those wh o devoted them selves to this ar t i n t h e said peri od, rarely roseabove m ediocr ity. We m ay observe, m oreover, that t wo of our re ligiouswh o h ad som e celebr ity as pain ter s, flourished i n t h e con ven t of Fiesole att h e begin n in g of t h e seven teen th cen tury. Th e first of these was FatherSan ti Tosi n i , whom som e have con foun ded w ith t h e blessed An gelico, wh olived t wo hun dr ed years before h i m . Th e secon d was a lay

-brother, n am edFr a Giovan n i da Firen ze

,con cern in g whom t h e con ven tual Chron icle gives

us t h e follow in g particulars An n . 1 606, Fa th er N ich olas Pan daljz’

n i , th e

h ead-sacri s tan , caused an alt ar an d an ar m ory to b e con s t r ucted f or t h e or a t oryof t h e sacr is ty. On sa id ar m ory t h er e was a pa i n t in g i n oi l, wh ich r epr esen ted

t h e An n un cia t ion ,an d

, as an ador n m en t to th e alta r , h e caused ot h er wr m or iesto b e m ade

,con ta i n i n g pi c tur es of t h e passi on , on t h e outer side of th e door s .

Th e i n si de of th e door s was decor a ted wi th por t r a i ts of S . Rom olo an d S .

An ton i n o. All t h ese pa i n t i n gs wer e executed by t h e h an d of Br ot h er Joh n deFlor en t ia

,a lay

-b r ot h er of th is m on as tery.

”A t presen t there is n o rem ain s

of an y work by either of these pain ter s.2 S t or ia della Pi t tur a i n Ispagn a dalRisorgim en to j in o ai n os t r i Gi or n i .


nico Th eotocopuli (a Greek pain t er an d sculptor, an d

pupil of Tiziano) bequeathed to Spain , where h e h adfixed h i s abode , was Father Mayno , con cernin g whosebirth-place an d social position we kn ow nothing. It i scert ain , however, that h e was born i n 1 569 . Like Fr aBartolom meo della Porta, h e di d n ot take t h e habittill h e was somewhat advan ced i n year s , nor have we

ascertained where or when h e en t ered t h e cloiste r . Ourearliest notice of h i m dat es so far back as 1 6 1 1 , an d rep t esen t s him as bein g then a very able artist, an d em ployedt o pain t a hist ory of S . Ildefen so, i n t h e sacristy of t h ecathedral of Toledo . At t h e sam e period h e pain ted t h eCircumcision of Our Lord in a cloiste r of t h e sam e

cathedral . Kin g Philip IV. ,who

,i n h i s boyhood , h ad

studied pain tin g u n der Father Mayn o , was at all timesin fluenced by our Dom in ican i n t h e various comm ission swhich h e e n trusted to artists ; an d i n this respect our pain t erwas highly useful to those wh o practised thatprofession . As

Th eot OCOpuli , or rather t h e Gr eek, t h e nam e by wh i ch h ewas usually designated , h ad in troduced t h e Venetianstyle into Spain

, t h e m anner followed by Father Mayn ogreatly resem bled that of Paolo Veron ese ; an d Mon tecuccoli adds, that h e was very fertile i n in ven tion , wellversed in Chiaroscuro , chast e i n design , an d bold an d freein h i s pen cillin g . Hi s best works ar e — t h e grand altarpiece in S . Marco , an d these i n t h e churches of S . Bar

t olom m eo an d S . Peter Martyr,i n Toledo. He also

pai nted a Chr i st lyi ng dead i n t h e arms of t h e E t ernalFather, an d this i s now in t h e possession of t h e Discalced

'

Carmeli tes i n Talavera de la Rej n a. For t h e con vent oft h e Dom in icans i n Salaman ca h e execute d a picture of

our holy Founder . For t h e church of h i s con freres inToledo , h e pain ted four pictures an d two angels, whichwere placed over t h e lat eral sepulchres of said church ;


to tread . An dre ’s preceptors , therefore , sent him t o Rom e ,

that h e m ight perfect him self by studyin g t h e wonderfulw orks ofRaffae llo an dMichelan giolo i n t h eVat i ean . Whenh e arrived i n Italy , t h e Rom an School was divided into twofaction s, which disputed pertin aciously for t h e ascen dencyi n pain tin g . They were , i n sooth , t h e Marius an d Sylla ,or ifyou will , t h e Guelfs an d Ghibellin es of their period .

In Naples, they would have resorted to t h e stiletto ; buti n Rome , they con ten t ed them selves with heapin g all

m an n er of in vective on each other. On e of these factions— that of t h e Cor t on ese— was led by Ciro Ferri ;an d t h e other— that of An drea Sacchi— was marshalledby Carlo Maratta.

1 Th e first carried off t h e palm i n

fresco-pain tin g . Th e second ruled supreme i n oil-pain ti n g ; an d if Ciro Ferri

’

s disciples trium phed in numberas well as i n fecundity, these of Carlo Maratta m ay b e

said to have excelled them i n t h e exquisite fin ish of theircom position s . But as Ciro Feri i died i n 1 689 , CarloMa

ratta assum ed t h e dictatorship of ar t , an d be in g sustainedby Clem en t XI . wh o h ad s t udi ed pa i n t i n g un der h im , h e

w as ultim ately appoin ted to direct all t h e pain tin gs whichwere then i n progress i n Rom e an d Urbin o . Our An dr e,

seein g that t h e Maratta faction h ad tri um phed , determ ined to espouse t h e m an n er of t h e victors, a resolvewhich

,in our j udgmen t, was de t ri m en tal to ar t an d t o

h i s own fam e . Havin g return ed to France , h e brought

w ith h im these prave m axim s which h e h ad learned i nI taly . Hi s charact er as a rapid an d im aginative pain t er ,soon procur ed h im very num erous commission s ; an d t h e

earliest production s of h i s pen cil were devoted t o a con

Carlo Maratta pai n ted t h e portrait of t h e celebrated Ir ish Fran ciscan ,Father Luke Wedd i n g, wh o wrote t h e im m en se work en titled “ An n alee

Mi n or n m .

” Th e ori gi n al portrait (whi ch h as been adm irably en graved) i si n t h e con ven t of S. l sidoro, Rom e.


ve n t which t h e Domin ican s h ad just the n obtain ed in t h eRue de Bac. Hi s con freres bein g highly delighted withh i s works , im m ediately en gaged h im to pain t all t h e picturesof t h e tran sept an d chapels of t h e church of S . On ore.

These pictures represen ted som e passages of our Lord'sPassion ; an d h e also executed som e like n esses of t h e

Sai nts of h i s Order . Whilst en gaged at these works,

h e was frequently visit ed by t h e celebrated pain te rs,

Hosse an d Jouve n e t ; an d , in deed , h e im itat ed t h e styleof t h e latter so adm irably , that som e of h i s productionsseem as though they h ad been retouched by this farfam ed artist . An dre ’s ability was n ow bruit ed abroad

,

an d t h e Fren ch Dom in ican s charged h im to executen um erous pain tin gs . These of Lyon s , i n par ticular ,besought him to pain t a picture of large dim ension s forthem ,

an d h e thereon produced t h e Pharisee ’sFeast, which ,for a lon g tim e , adorn ed t h e refectory of their con ven t.We have n ot ascertain ed where this work i s at presen t .For h i s con freres of Bordeaux h e pain ted two largepictures, on e of wh i ch represen ts t h e Marriage i n Can a

,

an d t h e other t h e Multiplication of t h e loaves . Th e

excellen t Society of S . Vin cen t de Paul com m ission edh im to execute som e works for the ir Church of S .

Lazarre , an d h e gladly un dertook to pain t som e

passages i n t h e life of their Foun der . He , therefore ,produced two pain tin gs, on e of which represents S .

Vin cen t , preachin g i n t h e hospital of t h e Holy Nam e ,

(whi ch h e built from t h e foundation s,) an d t h e other t h ecrownin g of t h e Sain t i n t h e kingdom of t h e Blessed .

These two works were e n graved by Her i sse t , Carle , an dDu Pin . Th e Fren ch biographe r who h as given uS

these notices of An dr e extols t h e com position of h ispaintin gs, an d praises t h e correctn ess of the ir design ,

although it i s not grandiose , but rather part akin g of


Maratta’s style . He describes him as elegant in t h e

clothing of h i s figures, although t h e folds of h i s draper ies

cannot b e said to b e facile or n atural. His colourin g,

con tinues t h e sam e authority, i s lively an d vigorous ;an d in this particular h e approaches t h e celebrat edJouven et . From all this we con clude , that this arti st ,(h ad h e been born in an other age , an d placed underother masters ,) would have revived t h e examples of

Fr a Bartolom m eo della Porta, an d of Father Mar aveja.

Am on gst h i s min or pain tin gs, we m ay men tion an

Adoration of t h e Magi , which h e execu t ed for '

t h e

Theatin es of Pari s ; a Nativity of our Lord , an d a HolyFam ily for t h e church of t h e Bon Pasteur ; a Deposi t ionfrom t h e Cross for t h e par ochial church of Epin ay ; an d,fin ally , a S . Genevieve , which was meant to b e placed ina chapel belon gin g to t h e Dom in ican s . This last workh e execut ed when h e h ad attain ed h i s n in etieth year .Hi s portraits of private citizen s ar e remarkable for their

truth an d beautiful ti n tin g. Havin g won such ren own ,

h e m ight easily have h ad him self n um bered amon gst t h emem bers of t h e Fren ch Academ y , but h e set little valueon titles ; an d like a really modest m an , regarded suchan hon our as in com patible with that hum ility whichh e professed an d practised .

‘ He died i n Pari s , A .D .

1 75 3 , aged n in ety—on e years . Tar aval, who was firstpain t er to t h e kin g of Sweden , was a disciple of thisDomin ican . Dumont, com mon ly called i lRom a n o, whowas subsequently Director of t h e French Academ y ofpaintin g, studied un der h i m , as di d also C h asle , a pain t erfam ed for h i s knowledge of perspective , an d who wasdecorated with t h e Cordon Noir .

Dic t i on n a ir e His tor ique Cr i t ique et Bib li ogr aph ique, Paris , 1 8 1 0, Tom . i . ,

p. 1 3 9 .


CHAPTER XX .

Father Vi n cen zo Maculan o, Cardin al of Holy Church ; an d som e otherA r chitects, an d C ivi l an d M ilitary En gin eers.

WE thin k that we ought to close these Mem oirs , whichcom prise a cycle of five cen turies , with t h e n am es of

Cardi n al Vin cen zo Maculan o , an d of som e other architeets an d m ilitary en gin eers , who e ither devoted themselves heart an d soul to t h e defen ce of their n ative lan d ,or employed all t h e tale n ts which God h ad given themfor i t s Splen dour an d adorn m en t . Thus as t h e artistichistory of t h e Preachin g-Friars comm en ced with sacredarchitecture , it m ust term in ate with t h e bran ches of t h esam e scien ce , kn ow n as civil an d m ilitary, Sin ce God an dFather-lan d ar e t h e sublim est obj ects of this ar t . But ifan ybody should obj ect to us that such studi es ‘

ar e

n ot com patible with t h e pacific , or rather con t em

plat ive state of t h e cloister life , or if it Should b e urgedthat m en who addict them selves to such pursuits mustn ecessarily frequen t t h e cam p an d battle-field i n tim e of

war , an d t h e assem blies of t h e people i n tim e of peace , wew ill answe r that there i s n o con dition of person s , n o matterhow sacred an d ve n erable , which i s not com man ded tolove t h e lan d o f their bi rth , an d to ar m for i t s defen cewhen such necessity arises. In fact, history gives us a

gran d exem plificat ion of this i n t h e person of PopeJulius t h e secon d , w h o i n h i s e ightie th year girded on

arm our, an d i n t h e depth of win ter placed him self at t h ehead of h i s troops in order to drive t h e barbarian s out ofItaly . This Pon tiff felt him self obliged to defen d h i sn ative lan d , an d to bless it ; an d h e doubtless held thatthese t wo du t ies were as pious as they were strin gen t .


Th e Domin ican Historian s who have chronicled t h elife an d works of Cardin al Vin ce n zo Maculan o descr ibeh im as an exem plar of all t h e virtues which shouldadorn t h e character of a religious, n ay, they in form us

that h e possessed an im m ense am oun t of sacred an d profan elearnin g ; but they have n ot cared to te ll us that h e wascelebrated for h i s profoun d kn owledge of mathem atics,an d of civil an d m ilitary architecture . In fact such wash i s fam iliarity with t h e latter bran ches, that h i s nam e h as

been in variably associated with these of Sam m ich eli

Marchi , Cat an eo , Lan tieri an d others. This silen ce on

their part, an d t h e absen ce of authe n tic docum ents,will n ot allow us to treat of this em in en t person age as

w e w ould w ish . Nevertheless w e w ill do our utm ost tothrow light on t h e life of t h e illustrious Cardin al .Vin cen zoMaculan o was born on t h e 1 1 t h ofSeptem ber,

1 5 78 , i n Firen zuola, a village situated on t h e con fin es ofTuscan y an d Rom agn a. At t h e age of Sixt een h e took t h eDom in ican habit , i n t h e City of Pavia , where h e m adesuch proficien cy i n sacred an d profane learn in g , that h esoon outstri pped all h i s com peers , an d gave prom ise thath e w ould on e day becom e a m ost distin guished m an . In

fact , h e was soon elect ed to fill som e of t h e m ost distin

gui sh ed offices of h i s Order ; an d such was h i s pruden cethat h e w as often chosen to adjudicate on public an d

private affairs , which were in volved i n doubt an d di thculty . He was for som e tim e In quisitor in Pavia ; an d

h e filled that office at a subsequen t period , i n

G en oa, where h e was destin ed to display h i s wonderfulknow ledge of m ilitary fortification s .

Carlo Em an uele , Duke of Savoy, h ad for a lon g timebeen plan n i n g t h e capture of t h e Republican City of

Gen oa, n or di d h e preterm it an y opportun ity that m ightthrow said city into h i s grasp . SC in tent was h e on t h e


destruction of t h e liberties of this republic , that h e didnot sh rin k from arm in g t h e parricidal han d of an i nfamous traitor , named Giulio Cesare Vachero , who , withothe r s , con spired to ruin h i s unhappy Father-lan d . Th e

conspiracy havi n g failed , t h e citizen s in flicted con di gnpunishment on t h e modern Catilin e , an d it was thenthat Carlo Em an uele resorted to open violen ce . Havin gform ed an allian ce with Fran ce , t h e French gen eral ,Lesdigh i er es , was despatched with forces to assist him ,

an d t h e two armies afte r having desolated t h e neighbouri n g coun try , sat down before hapless Genoa. Heaven ,however, watched over t h e republic ; for as t h e Dukean d Lesdi gh i er es h ad begun to diff er about their plan ,

(or it m ay b e that t h e latter h ad been bri bed,) theydelayed makin g t h e assault till t h e Gen oese were reinforced by Span ish subsidies , on t h e arrival of which , t h eSavoy an d French forces abandon ed their design .

1

It was durin g this war (which was all but fatal to t h eLigur i an Capital) that Maculano gave such sign al proofof h i s love of native-lan d. Gen oa was protect ed on t h e

land-Side by a triple wall ; but t h e hills which commandit

,were quite un furnished with an y defences, an d despite

their ruggedness, afforded an excellen t position for lighttroops, who could eas ily seize it , an d pour down the irfi r e on t h e people man n i n g t h e walls. Th e citizens, fullyaware of the ir dan ger an d an im ated by a true spirit ofpatriotism ,

prom ptly applied them selves to rem edy thisevil ; an d they determin ed on raisin g a fourth wall . Ont h e 7 t h of Decem ber , 1 62 7 , t h e Doge , Jacopo Lom elli n i ,

accom panied by t h e clergy, confraternities, an d electoralcolleges, proceeded i n great state , to lay t h e first stone ;an d this marvellous work , commenced only in 1 630, was

Car lo Be t ta, S tor ia d’ I talia , li b . XX. E. Xxl.


n am e roused an d stimulated them t o m ore vigorousexer tion ; thus did they toil on t h e hills an d t h e Slopes ;n or were they less in dustri ous i n t h e interior part of thiswall , for t h ey con struct ed an am bulatory (withi n it)fully sixty fee t wide , an d in eve ry respect fitted for t h emovemen t of heavy gun s, as well as for t h e accom m o

dation of t h e troops appoin ted to work them . Th e

greatest dan ger , however, was t o b e feared i n t h e direction of t h e valley of Bisagn o , where t h e site is m oreregular , an d lem precipitous ; but they soon provided t h eopportun e defences for this quarter , an d con str uct eddouble ram parts with their em brasures, covered-ways ,an d half m oon s. Th e whole work was greatlystren gthened by two little natural elevation s, which ,projectin g like two horn s , com m an ded t h e plain below ,

an d afforded am ple room for t h e workin g of t h e gun s,which were thus i n a position to open their fi r e on eitherside . These fortification s ren dered Gen oa alm ost im pregnable on t h e lan d-Side an d assaultable on ly from t h e sea .

”

In 1 62 9 Maculan o left Genoa , in order to atten d tosome m atters of gravest urgen cy ; an d im m edi ate ly afterSaid date , Pope Urban VIII , wh o was n ot on ly a n

en cour ager of lea r n ed m en , b u t m ade i t h is pa r t icular

b us i n ess to pr om ot e t h em accor di n g to t h ei r m er i ts , bein gfully con vin ced of t h e in tegrity an d pruden ce of our friar,invi ted h i m to Rom e an d appoint ed h i m Pr ocur a tor

Gen er al of t h e Dom in ican Institute , i n t h e Curia Rom an a.

At this period , t h e Gen eral of t h e Order h ad t o pr oceedto Fran ce on busin ess of im port an ce ; an d durin g h is

.

absen ce Maculan o was deputed t o fill h i s place in Rome .

In 1 63 2 Urban VIII . n am ed h im Com m issary-Gen eralof t h e Rom an In qu isition

,an d i n 1 63 9 Maste r of t h e Sa

cred Palace . Thus did t h e Pon tiff evin ce h i s high esteemfor this r eligion s, in whom h e placed so much co n fiden ce .


In fact, it was easy t o'

pe r ce i ve that h i s holin ess int endedto raise h im t o t h e cardin alitial dign ity . Maculan o , m ean

while , was com m iss ion ed to execute various works of

civil an d religious architecture , con cern in g which , owin g‘

t o t h e loss of an cien t records , we possess on ly verym eagre n otices. We kn ow , however , that h e repairedt h e fortification s of t h e Caste llo Urban o , i n t h e Bologn eset e rritory, as we ll as these of Adrian

’

s Mole ,” com m on ly

called Castel San t’ An gelo ; an d that h e restored that portion of t h e city wall which surroun ds t h e Vatican .

1 Nor

were these h i s on ly works , for at this period t h e Turkswere threaten in g to seize t h e islan d of Malta ; an d as i t

was n ecessary to stre n gthe n i t s defen ces, t h e In quisitorChi gi (afterwards Pepe Alexan der VII .) m em or ialed t h e

Pon tiff , at t h e request of t h e knights , to sen d thither som e

skilful e n gi n eer i n order to restore t h e old fortification san d con struct n ew on es. Th e Pon tiff thereon com m ission ed Pietro Paolo Flor ian i to proceed to t h e islan d, but '

as t h e Maltese Kn ights were n o t satisfied with t h e worksexecuted by h im ,

h e was succeeded by Maculan o,wh o

was charged by t h e Holy See to provide everythin gn ecessary fo r t h e security of such an im portan t garrison .

2

On h i s re turn to Rom e , Urban VIII . thought it tim e t o

reward him for these services by whi ch h e h ad won

un iversal applause an d esteem ; a n d h e, t h er efor e, cr ea t edh im Car di n al an d A r ch b ish op of Ben even to, on t h e l6t h

of Decem ber, 1 64 1 . Afte r havin g Spe n t sixteen m on ths

Fon tan a, Th ea tr . Dom i n i c. Echard, on t h e authority of Rovetta, at t r ibutes var ious works on m athem atics an d m ilitar y architecture to Maculan othese, however, ar e un published. He also says that our lear n ed fr iar gaveam ple description s an d design s of t h e works to which we have alluded.

V. S criptor. 0rd. Freedie., v. 2 , p . 62 3 .

Pallavicin o, Vi ta di Alessan dr oVII. Touron,Histoi r e des Hom m es illus v

t r es de l’Or dr e de S . Dom i n ique, t om v.


govern ing h i s diocese , h e was recalled to Rome by PopeUrban , who w ished to avail hi m self of t h e Car dinal’sadvice an d suggest ions , n ay, an d of h i s gen ius as an

archi tect. Wherefore , as h i s Eminence found that h ecould not att end to t h e affairs of t h e archbishopric , h ede livered th i s high di gnity in t o t h e hands of him whoh ad conferred it. On t wo occasions, Maculano was verynear havin g a decided maj ority i n t h e conclave . Th e

first of these was when t h e Cardin als assembled t o elect asuccessor to Urban VIII ., who died on t h e 2 9th of July ,1 644. A t t h is per i od a si n gle addi t ion al vot e would h ave

r a ised t h is m a n , so dis t i n gui sh ed as a m a t h em a t i cia n ,

en gi n eer , a n d a r ch i t ect , to t h e h igh es t of all ea r t h lyd ign i t ies . Th e secon d occasion was aft er t h e death of

Pope Innocent X ., who deceased on t h e 7 t h of Jan uary ,

1 655 ; but it m ay b e as well to say n othi n g of t h e

in fluences which excluded Maculan o from t h e papacyatthis pe riod .

‘ At len gth t h e Lord called t h e Cardin al ou tof this life on t h e 1 5 th of February , 1 665 , after h e h adattain ed h i s eighty-e ighth year ; an d we deem it almostsuperfluous to state , that h e left behin d him t h e name an d

fam e of a m an who was not on ly rem arkable for h i slearnin g, but also a zealous min ist er of t h e sanctuary ,an d on e of t h e most distinguished military enginee rs ofh i s period .

We wi ll now speak of Father Antonio Am brogini , fort h e notices of whose life we ar e in debted to FatherFederico di Poggio , t h e hist orian an d librarian of S .

Romano di Lucca. This writ er collec t ed m an y factsrelat ing t o this military engineer, from a person wh o

As these two Pepes (Urban VIII. an d In n ocen t X.) ar e i n tim atelyi den tified with t h e religious an d poli t icalhi story of Irelan d in t h e seven teen thcen tury, t h e reader i s referred to R i n ucci n i ’s “ Nunziatwn i n I r la n da ,

"a

work which is replete with t h e greatest i n t eres t.


which h e foun ded , an d which se n t forth m any verycelebrated en gin eers , surveyors , e t c . Nor did h e fail t oleave us m an y mon um en ts of h i s gen ius. Som e say thath e built t h e beautiful bridge of S . Pietro , which spanst h e Serchio ; but there ar e some who doubt this . Therear e at presen t i n t h e library of t h e con ven t of S . Rom an o

at Lucca, t wo qui n t e r n s of reports , by this Father. On e

of these con tain s a n um ber of le tters addressed to t h eperson s appoin ted t o superin ten d t h e w orks on t h e river ;an d t h e other gi ves us a valuable report relatin g to t h eSerchio . Th e letters ar e dated from 1 699 t o 1 700; an d

they , as well as t h e report, ar e m an ifest eviden ces ofAm b r ogi n i

’

s profoun d skill i n such matters.

His com patriots preserve a beautiful geographical chartof t h e te rritory of Diecimo

,which this Father executed

w ith a pen : this h e dedicated to Cardin al Buon vi si . Oft h e sam e characte r was an other chart of t h e Milan eseState , which was preserved in t h e fam ily of t h e Jacopi .‘

Father Federico di Poggio says , that h e h ad these chartsin h is possession for a con siderable period. Father Am

b r ogi n i died in h i s natal-place on t h e 1 7th of August ,1 72 2

, aged sixty-seven . Many other valuable rem ainsof this Father have been lost. It i s said that h e was as

much given to melan choly as h e was t o study ; an d thath e was always absorpt in profoun dest m editation s .

We wi ll now expen d a few words on some o therar t ificer s

, fearin g we m ight b e te r m ed in grates were weto overlook them . Th e first, therefore , shall b e t h e

Flemish architect an d en gin eer, Father Francesco Romain , com mon ly called ll Fr a te Rom an o. He was bornin Gand, A .D . 1 646 . I know n o t at what period h e t ook

I t. bear s t h ezfollowi n g in scr iption Th e State ofMilan di vided in to i t sParts by F.A. Am br ogi n i of Diecim o, of t h e Order of Preachi n g-Friar s, 1 698.


t h e Dominican habit ; but it would appear that h e appliedhim self zealously to t h e study of m athem atics an d architecture . AS soon as h e h ad e stablished h i s reputation ;t h e States—Gen eral of Hollan d em ployed h im ( 1 684) t obuild an arch of t h e bridge of Maestricht. At a sub se

quen t period h e m ust have executed very m an y beautifulw orks i n h i s native lan d , for we ar e in form ed that LouisXIV.

,kin g of Fran ce , a great patron ofartists an d lit erary

m en ,havi n g heard of our friar’s ability , in vited h i m t o

Paris, an d charged h im to complete t h e Pon t Royalwhich h ad been com m en ced by Gabriel . Father Rom ainfi n ished this w ork to t h e kin g

’

s m ost perfect satisfaction ,

an d thus m erited t h e title of Royal Architec t , In spectorof Bridges , e t c. When w e con sider t h e num ber of

em in en t m en that Fran ce possessed at this period , wemust adm i t that t h e regal hon ours con ferred on our friarar e t h e clearest proofs of h i s skill an d profoun d kn owledge . Th e historian who h as given uS these few n oticesof F . Rom ain , says, that h e was a m an of m ost exem plarylife , an d that h e con secrated h i s heart an d soul to religionan d ar t . He closed h i s days i n Paris, i n 1 7 3 5 , agedeighty-n i n e .

l

Nor should we forget to m en tion Fr a Pietro PaoloBelli , t h e architect, with whose n am e we brin g our

Mem oirs down to t h e presen t cen tury . Th e city of Jesi ,i n t h e Marches of An con a, was t h e n atal-place of thisDom in ican lay-brother. We have n ot ascertain ed t h e

year of h i s bir th or of h i s religious in vestm en t. Somen otices sen t to us from Rom agn a state , that h e directedall t h e restoration s i n t h e church of h i s con freres inAn con a, though h e did n o t furn ish t h e design . Th e

m em oranda of t h e Con ve n t of Pesaro state that Belli was

Diction n aire H istorique, Critique, e t Bibliographique, t om . vn ., p . 1 53 .


domici led in that city in 1 790. In 1 79 1 b e restored variousfabrics belongin g to t h e Dom in icans of Pesaro ; an d

t hree years afte r said dat e , h e likewise restored t h e

church degli An gi oli in Novillera. When Father PaoloLastrico was prior of t h e con vent of Pesaro , t h e religiousdete rmin ed to erect a n ew church , an d they char gedBelli to build it. Wherefore , havin g furn i shed a designwhi ch pleased h i s em ployers , h e im mediately se t aboutraising t h e walls . In 1 797 , however, Belli was obligedt o aban don t h e work , as t h e revolut ionary doin gs of t h eperiod , h ad filled t h e pen insula with anarchy an d desolat ion . When t h e times chan ged , t h e Dom in ican s resum edpossession of t h e Pesarese Con ven t, an d Belli , at t h e

in stan ce of Father Vin cen zo Camurati , then supe rior,recommenced t h e building in 1 806 . Th e whole was

fin ished in t h e Septem ber of 1 806 , an d in t h e followin gyear t h e good lay-brother passed in to e t ern al rest.Some architects who flour ished i n t h e seventeenthcen tury, an d whom we have reluctan tly omitted on

accoun t of t h e pen ury of t h e notices regardin g them ,

Should at least b e men tioned i n these pages . There was ,for example , Father Domen ico Paglia , who furn ished t h edesign of t h e rich chapel , sacred to our Founder , in t h eMinerva at Rom e . He also design ed t h e grand piazzaopposite to t h e bridge of S . An ton io In t h e city of San

severino in t h e Marches of Ancon a. Af te r h im we

m ay mention Father Dom en ico Pepar clli , t o whom someattribute t h e Bon elli Palace (n ow called Im periali) i nt h e Piazza of t h e Santi Apost oli at Rome ; a palacewh i ch Milizia, a most severe criti'c , pron oun ces to b e of

good a n d wellpr opor t ion ed a r ch i t ectur e.

1 This architect

Mem . degli arch i tet t i an t i ch i e t c. vol. n . I b elieve, however, that FatherPagan elli was t h e architect of this palace.

3 2 6 u n m om s or EMINENT PAINTERS,

make sm all copies of all t h e pain tin gs i n t h e Gallery of t h eUfii zj i n Floren ce . I kn ow n ot what becam e of this immen se work ; but , beyon d doubt, it reflected t h e greatesthonour on h im , an d obtain ed for h im t h e privilege ofhavin gh i s own portrait placed i n t h e sam e Gallery am on gst theseof t h e m ost distin gui shed pain ters of Eur ope .

1 An tece

den t ly to Father Ben edetto , Floren ce was j ustly proud oft wo o ther celebrated pen sm en

,Can t-agalli n a an dMati ; but

neither of them attain ed to such excellence or diligenceas G r eyss . Every on e knows h ow great w as t h e celeb r i ty which t h e two Bologn ese pain t ers, Bartolomm eoPasserotti an d Agostin o Caracci h ad won by t h e exerciseof this ar t ; an d it i s scarcely n ecessary to say that t h elatt er practised it much i n order to become t h e excellen te n graver which h e really was . G r eyss likew ise addi ctedhimself to t h e burin

,but t h e on ly e n gravin g of h i s

kn own to m e , i s t h e portrait of Cardin al Albertin o diPrato , copied after that of Sim on e Mem m i

,i n t h e great

chape l of t h e Span iards i n S . Maria Novella.

I dare n ot om it men tion in g t h e Dom in ican pain tress ,Sister An n a Vittoria Dolara, a n un of t h e m on as tery of

S . M . Magdalen e on Mon te Cavallo in Rom e . Sh e

was , in sooth , a highly gifted wom an,rem arkable

alike for h er piety , for h er poetical abilities, an d for h e r

excellen ce in pain tin g an d m in iaturin g. When t h e

Fre n ch troops carried off Pope Pius VI ., an d expelled

t h e inmates of t h e cloisters , they spared t h e con ven t of

G reyes executed h i s own portrait w ith a pen , an d represen ted him selfholdin g a sc r oll which bears this in scriptionPr . Ben edictus Vi n . De. Greyss. ord . Prazdica t . Theologus, Patr ia

Li b em en si s, or igi n e Germ an us, ab im peratore Csesar e Fran cisco Lot h er i n gicoPio

,Feli ce, Augusto, tabulis pict i s sign i s an aglypt is, quse i n r egio C im e

liarco Floren t iaa asser van t ur , ca lam o deli n ean di s pr azpos i t us, sua se ipsumm an u efii n ix i t an n o salut is 1 758.

Lan z i, Bologn ese School, 2 n d Epoch.


S . Mary Magdelen e , moved to pity, no doubt , by t h em an y virt ues of i t s poor an d observan t siste rhood .

Nevertheless they deprived them of all mean s of sub si stence ; thus provin g them selves at on e an d t h e same tim e

merciless an d m erciful . Th e good Dolara pli ed h er

pen ci l n igh t an d day, a n d t h us , a s well as by t h e alm s

wh ich sh e r eceived fr om t h e pious ci t izen s , elesd ou t

suppor t f or h er self an d s is t er s . Thin kin g that sh e mightfind solace i n poesy , an d , in deed , it h as often soothedt h e agon ies of t h e hum an heart, sh e com posed a poem i nwhich sh e bewails t h e m iser ies which t h e sacrilegiousFren ch h ad in fli cted on t h e E tern al city . Non e can

read t h e “ D i rge of t h e Rom an Vi rgi n s i n t h e days oft h e t er r i b le dem ocr acy,

”l without feelin g t h e t ears fillin gh i s eyes. It i s i n t h e m etre which t h e Italian s call Ot tava

R im a ,

”an d we give a few passages for t h e reader’s sa

t i sfact ion

Affli cted Vir gin s we ; an d n ear to quitti n gOur m ortal spoils, con sum ed by wan t an d woeWith an gui sh, such a m ourn ful sight befittin g

,

We watch our sacred dwellin g’s overthrow ;Nor shall our sorrow suffer in term ittin g,Our tear s, un soothed, shall n ever cease to flow,

If thou , O God, wilt n ot in m ercy t umA pityi n g eye upon us where we m ourn .

Day after day, t h e turtle—sweet lam en tin gBr oodet h , 3. Providen ce, aroun d h er n est ;N ight after n ight, t h e clover pasture scen tin g,Wen det h t h e sated sheep to quiet r estRetired w ithin these cloisters, an d repen tin g,We hoped t o di e, an d i n t h e hope were blest ;

But oh ! just heaven , what wolfi sh hordes b er oam ,

What ca r r ion birds in fest our chosen hom e

l Th e ori gin al title of t h e poem run s t hus. I lp ian to delle Sacr e

Rom a n s n ella f un es ta Dem ocr azia di Rom a , Composi zion e di Suor An n a

Vi t t or ia Dola r

a D om en i can a i n S. M. Madda len a , f r a gli Ar cadi FIor i n da


This accomplished nun possessed a considerableknowledge of Latinity , indeed, far greater than i susually attain ed by an y lady in or ou t of t h e

cloister. Sh e was also well skilled i n vocal an d i n

s t rum en tal music , an d was wont to cheer h er afflictedsisterhood with man y a strain of melody . PiusVII. ,

who held Sister Dolara in t h e highest esteem ,

often visit ed h er i n h er lon ely cell , an d on more thanon e occasion sat to h er for h i s portrai t. These liken esseswere admirably pain ted ; an d Pope Leo XII ., conferreda similar honor on this ornament of t h e cloist er. Th e

Arcadia of Rome , elected h er a m ember of the ir learnedbody

, an d gave h er t h e name ofFlor i n da Ca r i s ia . Thuswere all t h e accom plishm en t s of Sister Plautilla Nelli ,t h e Paintress , an d of t h e Poe tess , Sister Loren za Strozzi ,revived in t h e person of t h e gifted Dolara. Amon gst h er

Car is ia, Rom a, 1 8 1 8. I am in debted to t h e Rev. J. Ken yon , P.P

Tem plederry, for t h e tran slation given i n t h e text. As t h e reader m ay

desire to see t h e origin al verses, we subjoin them .

Noi siam o oppresse ed a lasciar vici n eFr a l

’i n edia e il dolor l'afii i t t a spoglia

Crolla il sacro edifi zo ; e le rovi n ePen der veggiam i n afi

’

a n n osa doglia ;Ne

’del n ostro pen ar si scorge il fi n e,Ne il pian to n ostr o v’ e chi t erger voglia ;

Se t u placato alfi n , D io de’ viven ti,Dolce pietadel n ostro m a! n on sen ti’.

Passa la tortorella i (ii securaDolcem en te gem en do en tro il suo n ido

,

Tom a i l gr egge all'ovil dalla pastur e.Sen za tim or di’ tr adim en to i n fido.

Noi pure en tran do in queste elett e m uraCredem m o d’ afi'er r ar securo Ii do ;

Ma ad i n s idi ar n e, oh ciel, sem b t en d'accordoL’ avoltoio rapace e il lupo in gordo."


of t h e lives an d works of t h e most Em i n en t Painte rs ,Sculptors an dArchitects of t h e Dom in ican Order

,ofwhom

alon e w e mean t to write . At som e future period we hopet o b e able to produce a m ore perfect work

,which shall

b e t h e result of m ore diligen t an d extens ive researches.

CHAPTER XXI .

Origi n of t h e presen t Mem oirs an d Epilogue.

IN t h e autum n of 1 840, afte r crossin g t h e rugged crestsof t h e Ligur ian Apen n in es, I j ourn eyed alon g t h e sm ilin gban ks of t h e Arn o . Th e glorious Sky of liquid blue , t h eteem in g fertility of t h e soil , an d t h e balmy ai r of t h e

beauteous clim e filled my soul with in e ffable delight .But far m ore charm in g to my en raptured vision were t h ein n um erable m on um en ts raised by t h e gen iusOf this illust r i ous people , i n t h e crowded cities , on t h e sun n y uplands ,an d in t h e fruitful valleys. Alm ost spell-bound on b e

holdin g such m agn ificen ce , an d while m ymemory revertedt o t h e b ye

-

gon e greatn ess of this classic lan d , I askedmy guide to te ll m e t h e n ames of t h e artists wh oupreared these wondrous works. From tim e to tim e

h e m en tion ed som e confrere of min e , with whose namemy ear was not fam iliar. In Pisa, Prato , Pi st oja, Flore n ce

,Corton a, an d Arezzo , h e con tin ued to repeat t h e

n ame of som e member of t h e Dom in ican Order. Ast on i sh ed at discovering this colon y of Religious Artists ,I betook m yself to t h e hist ory of our In stitute , but i t spages told m e nothi n g of these celebrated m en . I thencrossed t h e moun tain s of Um bria, an d descen ded intot h e fertile plains of t h e Romagna, an d here I foun d


an other ban d of art ists belon gi n g to m y Order, who ,if

‘

n ot equal to t h e form er , ar e , n evertheless , far frombein g obscure . I Shut m yself up i n t h e archives ; Isearched t h e librari es ; an d, aft er a very brief in terval ,collected abun dan t n otices of their lives an d w orks .

My or igin al in ten tion was to shape them in to a series ofhistorical sketches ; but fin din g that m y researches produced an accum ulation of m atter

,I resolved to en large

t h e con fin es of m y labours . Such,reader, i s t h e work

which I n ow subm it to your perusal, a work which I

have wr itten at a period when m y health was in fir m ,

an d i n tim es which have filled m yheart with profoun destmelan choly . I have here en deavoured to describe toyou , although im perfectly , h ow m uch m y con freres havedon e for t h e ben efit of t h e Arts

,durin g a period of more

than six hun dred years . They saw t h e light i n t h e

days of t h e Ren aissan ce ; an d we fi n d them at an earlym om en t associated with Niccolo Pisan o , t h e m an whofirst revived sculpture an d architectur e i n Italy . Aft erhavin g essayed sculptur e , an d left two sple n did m on um en tsof the ir chisel i n t h e Ur n of

_

S . Dom in ic i n Bologn a ,an d on t h e facade of t h e cathedral of Orvie to , whiche tern izes t h e n am e of Fr a Guglielm o Agn elli , theydevoted them selves hear t an d soul to civil an d religiousarchitecture . An d

,in deed , if an y on e should ever

un dertake to write t h e history of th i s m ost n oble ar t , h e

m ust n ecessarily throw m u ch light"

on what t h e Dom in ican s have don e for i t s advan cem en t i n a cycle of fourhun dred years . In Rom e

,Floren ce , Pisa an d Ven ice ,

they f orm ed a com m un ity of architects , en gin eers, an d

m ason s ; an d they practised these various bran ches for t h eb en efi t of t h e differen t States— n ay, an d of t h e privatecitizen s

,with a zeal an d in telligen ce of which m on astic

history furnishes n o parallel . Mean while , pain tin g arose


an d grew t o grandeur with Giotto , Gaddi , Mem m i , an d

m en of such stamp . It was then that this divine ar t

began t o echo t h e sublime st rains of Ali ghieri , an d toconsole Italy in t h e days of h er direst tribulations . Th e

Preachin g-Friars could n ot remain insensible t o t h e

fascination of such beauties ; an d they, therefore , devotedthem selves t o pain tin g , with that intensity of ardourwhich characterised their cultivation of archit ectur e .

They commen ced with min iature , which was t h e usualappren ticeship of t h e Giotto School ; an d they invariablyapplied themselves at t h e same tim e t o glass-paint i ng,wh i ch m ay b e said to have been t h e inseparable compan ion of m iniature in t h e dark ages . In fact, these twoarts sprun g in to existen ce Simultaneously, were subjectedto t h e sam e vicissitudes, an d Shared on e common fate .

Hence t h e noble band of artists that we have recorded .

A n d if Min iatur e glories i n t h e n ame of t h e BlessedGoivan n i An gelico , Glass-Pain ting m ay reason ably prideitself on that of t h e Blessed James of Ulm ,

both of whomwere illustrious for

,

their san ctity an d art istic,powers .

Aft er t h e lapse of about two centuries an d a half, duringwhich t h e cultivators of these twin-b om arts produced somany, an d such glorious, mon uments of their genius ,both Miniature an d Glass-Paintin g closed their careerwith Fr a Eustachio of Florence , an d Fr a Guglielmo ofMarcillat.But Paintin g was destined to e n j oy a more protracted

an d glorious existen ce . We have written at considerablelength , of t h eAn gelico an d ofPorta , nor have we hesitatedto confess our inability to treat of e ither of them in thatstyle , which t h e sublim ity of their merits deman ds . Butafter having seen t h e Deposition from t h e Cross, an d t h eFin al Judgm ent by t h e former ; an d t h e S . Mark , an d t h eother paint in gs of t h e lat t er now in Lucca, every on e will

3 3 4 MEMOIRS OF EMINENT PAINTERs ,

ous weapons from their hands, sat down to min iature a

codex , or to illum in at e som e choral book for the ir lectern s.

Often an d often after m in isterin g t h e con solation sof religionto t h e moribun d , h as t h e Friar resum ed h i s pen cil t o depict t h e sublim est pages of t h e Bible on can vas , or on t h ewalls of h i s church an d cloister . Iden tified dur ing a protracted period with all t h e j oys an d sufferin gs of society

,

they m ade it t h e gran d busin ess of the ir lives , t o supplyi t s great m oral an d in tellectual requirem en ts ; an d n ot

con ten t with th i s, they laboured in defatigably to decorate the ir natal soil with t h e choicest production s of theirgenius an d workm an ship . Tim e , that h as destroyed so

man y of m an’

s m on um en ts , an d m an , who , alas ! forge t sso soon

,h as n ot been able to obliterate t h e traces of their

love for ou r beautiful , but un fortun at e Italy . Th e last century requited all t h e services which t h e religi ous Ordersh ad con ferred on society , w ith exile an d rapin e . Th e

prese n t h as revin dicated their m em ories an d rights ; but,as it h as revived us , it justly expec t s that we w ille n title ourse lves to i t s esteem an d con fide n ce

,by works

worthy of our callin g . Our m ission therefore i s, t o r e

kin dle t h e fi r e of charity i n bosom s which have beenchilled by social egotism , to in fuse n ew life i n to heartswhich have been weaken ed by t h e corruptin g i n fluen cesof these tim es ; t o con secrate our e n ergies to t h e am elioration of t h e people ; to revive t h e love of study , an d of

profoun d learn in g , thus , provin g by every act of our lives ,as well as by our pen s , that Religion , however i n flexi b ly it m ay b e opposed to a spurious an d false progress ,i s , n evertheless , t h e truest protectress of soun d kn ow ledgean d t h e m ost zealous patron ess of n ation al prosperity .

Nor should we forge t t h e Arts , for it i s in cum ben t on us

to redeem them from t h e cold an d servile im itation of t h e

ancients , to in spire them with noble an d sublim e se n ti


ments, an d to associate them with moral philosophy,chas t e n ed eloquen ce , an d all that i s san ctified by Religi on .

This , in deed , i s our glorious mission ; wherefore , if thereb e an y am on gst us, who h as n ot ability for t h e literaryor scien tific aren a, let h im remem ber , that t h e field ofArt i s open to h im : le t him who can n o t speak from t h e

professor’s chair , or from t h e pulpit, speak with t h e ch i se lan d t h e pen cil , but le t us all speak a n oble , an d holy language . Never let us forget , that w e saved t h e Arts i nt h e days of barbaric devastation s ; an d that we shelteredan d cherished them i n t h e tim es of

“

t h e Ren aissan ce .

Never le t us forget , that we warm ed them with t h e breathof our heart s , an d that we educated them for t h e hon ouran d glory of Christian ity. Wh y should we repudiate a

glory which i s all our ow n — a glory of which we havebeen so lon g t h e un disputed possessors ? Actin g thus ,we will con vin ce all m an kin d that we have fully com

prehended t h e sublim ity of our vocation ; an d for everyben efit we bestow on t h e people , we shall rece ive t h e b en edict ion s of grateful hearts .

Such,reader , ar e t h e m otives , which in duced m e t o

write t h e Mem oi r s of t h e m os t Em i n en t Pa i n ter s , Sculptor s , a n d A r ch i t ect s of t h e Or der of S . Dom i n ic. I n ow

offer this work,as a tribute of affection ate gratitude t o

our age an d coun try , an d as an acknow ledgm en t of t h e

great obligation s which both have con ferred on us .

Would that I were able to produce som ethin g better calculat ed to prove how deeply sen sible I am of these obli

gat ion s ; but , even though I m ay have fallen far short ofm y in ten tion s , I can say, w ith sin cerity , that I havelaboured accordin g to t h e best of m y ability .

ILLUSTRATIONS

52min r an tings in its en t ran t, unit 3 1111111 !t alle r;

T HE B A P T I S M o r J E S U S C H R I S T,

A PAINTING ON PANEL,

GIOTTO DA RONDONE DA VESPIGNANO.

SOME on e h as wr itten , I kn ow n ot whether in jest orearnest, that t h e Italian s were obliged to in vit e t h e

Byzantin es to vis it their pen in sula in t h e m iddle ages, t orevive t h e Arts , an d to teach them to our forefathers . A

more deplorable condition than this we can n ot im agin e ;an d those who made t h e assertion did n ot hesitat e t o

add, that t h e German s, influenced by some such feelin gsof commiseration , were t h e first to indoctrinate us inSculpture an d Archit ecture . At a subsequen t pe r iod, sayt h e abettors of this opin ion , when Byzantin e genius wasin t h e wan e , or when they grew tired of in structin g us,t h e German s were our on ly teachers— t h e only m en whocared t o inspire us wi th a love of t h e thr ee Sister-Artsn or do we lack proofs of this assertion . Out of t h e man yle t us select t h e followi ng All t h e arts of design ,

3 3 8 ILLUSTRATIONS or PAINTING S

adm irable , h e was able to reduce it to such un ity an d

m arvellous sim plicity,that n e ither t h e Greeks who

flourished before h im,n or Lion ardo , n or Raffaello , who

lived at a later period,were able to produce an ythin g

better . But sin ce Guerrazzi an d La Farin a have w ritt ena glori ous vin dication of this father of Italian p aintin g,we will con fin e ourselves to a few observation s.Th e Baptism of Jesus Christ , by thi s illustrious m aster,possesses all t h e m erits which w e , withMin ardi , recogn izei n Giotto . No on e can behold this work without be in gstruck by t h e pro foun d revere n ce of t h e Baptist , an d t h eti rn i di ty with which h e approaches h i s sublim e fun ction .

Th e Redeem er’s attitude evin ces t h e m ost m arked hum ili ty, an d He seem s to in spire t h e Baptist with con fiden ce ,while He ben ds Hi s sacred brow an d whole personben eath t h e m in istry of John . Th e two disciples w h ohold t h e Redeemer’s garm en ts , ar e characte rized by t h eten derest an d most affection ate devotion . Won derfullybeautiful i s t h e figure of t h e Etern al Father , who i srepresen ted sen din g down t h e Paraclete on t h e Wordmade Flesh ; an d t h e action i s so true , that we ar e at

on ce rem in ded of t h e sacred text , Thi s i s my belovedSon : hear ye Him .

” If, after havin g con sidered t h e

m erits of t h e con ception , an d t h e m an n er i n which t h eartist h as developed it , we direct our atten tion to t h e

geometrical part of t h e composition , w e must in stantlyperceive h ow m arvellous was Giotto’s success i n rescuingar t from t h e in fluen ce of t h e old tradition s. Th e nudeof t h e Redeem er , an d t h e figure of t h e precursor i s welldesign ed ; t h e arran gem ent of t h e drapery i s facile an d

spon tan eous , coverin g but not con cealin g t h e person ;an d all t h e parts harm on ize so adm irably , that they eas ilyproduce that un ity which i s t h e most essen tial predicateof a picture as well as of a poem .

IN THE FLORENTINE ACADEMY. 3 3 9

Our age h as restored literature by t h e st udy of

Dan te , an d t h e golden Trecen to : m ay t h e studyof Giotto an d h i s followers serve to r e-in vigorate ItalianPain tin g !

L E G E N D OF S . H U M I L I T Y ,

A PICTURE ON PANEL,

BUONAMICO BUFFALMACCO.

THE civil an d political con dition of Italy in t h e thirt een t h ce n tury , very rarely showered roses on con jugalun ion . It frequen tly happen ed that a m omen tary trucerecon ciled t wo fam ilies who h ad lon g been at deadlyfeud ; or , un ited i n m atrim on ial ban ds two hearts whichdid n ot love reciprocally . Need we say that san guin ary hatreds often kept apart two souls which werecreated to love , an d live for each other’s weal ? Th e

dagger an d t h e poison often destroyed a un ion whichw as suggested by t h e sordid thirst of gold ; an d t h e exileof kin sm en often widowed a m other or a spouse prem a

t ur ely. At such a period,when ven geance an d factious

hatred burn ed i n every bosom ; when this lan d was

desolated by t h e stran ger an d i t s ow n children ; whenm en bequeathed to posterity , n ot their possessions ,but their deadliest en m ities, it was n o unusual thin gfor a heart that execrated a soil m oist with t h e

blood an d tears of those it prized , to raise itself abovesuch accursed scen es, i n order to con tem plate that blessedabode where tyran n y can n ot en t er, an d where t h e vile

3 40 ILLUSTRATIONS or PAINTING S

i n terests of this miserable life n ever can com e in to colli

Towards t h e middle of that ce n tury a m aiden , orrather an an gel in hum an sem blan ce , on e whose heartyearn ed for t h e pure j oys of heaven , was com pelled byt h e avaricious in terests of h er fam ily , to wed a youthfulcavalier. S h e was called Rosan e ; an d h e Ugolo t t o Cacc ian em i ci o f Faen za. Both were of n oble lin eage , an dboth deserved to b e happy because vi rtuous ; if happin esscould have been foun d mid such scen es of blood an d

h avoc . O n e day t h e youthful bride addressed h e r h usban d thus , “ Dost thou n ot feel that w e can fi n d n o realperm an en t happin ess here on earth , an d should w e n o t

aspire t o that peace an d bliss which we can attain i nheaven ? Le t us, therefore , separate for a while , an d i nt h e silen ce of som e cloister m ake a sacrifice of ourselves toGod for our coun try

,our kin dred , an d for all those

whom we love . Tim e flee t s by with lightn in g speed ,an d we shall soon b e re un ited i n t h e kin gdom of heaven

,

where we shall e n joy all that felicity which h as bee nden ied us here below . Ugolo t t o asse n ted ; an d h e an d

Rosan e , who took t h e nam e of Hum ility , lived a m ostholy an d aust ere life , accordin g to t h e rule of Vallom

brosa .

Th e pathetic epopee of this heroin e of t h e dark ages ,deserved to b e tran sm itted to future tim es by Italianpaintin g , which then delighted to se lect i t s subjects , noton ly from t h e Bible

,but from these pious legen ds of

which t h e people w ere so fon d ; an d which,like t h e

Chron icles of Malaspin a an d Villan i , ar e t h e most unerrin g guides to t h e in n erm ost nature of an age so prolifico f good , an d so tremen dous i n i t s evils . Buffalm acco

u n dertook to pain t this legen d i n eleven little histories,i n on e of which h e represented t h e bride i n t h e act of

3 42 ILLUSTRATIONS or PAINTINGS

Italian verse , an d creat ed that marvellous poem i n whosestructure , heaven an d earth m ayb e said to have taken part .Th e secon d was Simon e Mem m i

, who , after havin g impart ed gracefuln ess to t h e severe forms of h i s m aster ! wen tin search of t h e beau-ideal , an d secured for him self t h e lovean d esteem of Pe trarca, wh o tran sfused such copiousnessd harmon y i n t o our idiom . Th e on e h as im m ortali zed

Laur a in h i s deathless sonn ets,an d t h e other m ay b e

sai d to have apotheosized h er by h i s glorious pen cil .Th e third was Buon am ico Bufl

'

alm acco, that b izarre an d

fantastic gen ius , who m ay b e justly term ed a j on gleur ofpai nting. Every on e kn ows what delight h e took i namusin g hi m self at t h e expe n se of old An drea Tafi an d

t h e sim ple Calandrin o . Thi s em in en t artist i s e tern izedi n t h e pages of t h e Cert aldese , where we fi n d suchin terest ing details of h i s facetiousn ess . Even though t h epain tin gs of these thr ee grand m asters should perish , t h eDivin a Com m edia, t h e Can zon iere , an d t h e Decam eron e

shall perpetuate the ir mem ories for everm ore . Buffal~

m aceo’s artistic gen ius was truly marvellous, albe it h edid n ot study overm uch .

“ Wh en h e wished to apply

h i m m lf diligen tly ,”says Vasari , “ although that di ligence

was fi t ful, h e was in ferior to n o m an of h i s period .

’

In

h i s truth ful imitat ion of nature , an d i n facility of developin g h i s con ception s , h e was excelled by non e of thosewho preceded or cam e after h i m . Accordi n g to Redi ,h e was t h e first to aban don t h e style so in variably followed by t h e Greeks in depictin g t h e Sain ts . We need

scarcely say that they represen ted t h e den izen s of heaven

as sallow,gloomy be in gs ; whereas Bufl

‘

alm acco gave suchhappy tin tings to the ir coun ten an ces, that they looked

as if they h ad been painted in blood an d milk .

”

Giotto.

IN THE FLORENTINE ACADEMY . 3 43

Hen ce,h e was won t to say to t h e n uns of t h e Con ven t of

Faen za Fe tch m e from your cellars som e of that racyver n acci a , (Tuscan win e ,) that I m ay b e able to in fuseb lood in to t h e ve in s of my Sain ts, an d

i

com for t this poorold stom ach .

”

He m ay b e said to have reduced pain tin gto a species of parody : an d som e of h i s works resem blea can to of t h e Orlan do In n amorato , or of t h e Morgan teMaggiore . For t h e n uns of Vallom brosa h e pain ted t h eLegen d of S . Hum ility , as sh e was the ir foun dress. He

represen ted t h e holy wom an assistin g at t h e reli giousin vestm en t of h er hu sban d, Ugolot t o . Th e com positioni s on e of extrem e sim plicity . Th e chapel in which t h ecerem on y takes place i s approached through a gracefulGothic peristyle . Before t h e altar stan ds a priest , i n t h e

act of clothin g t h e n ew can didate with t h e sacred habit ;an d Ugolot t o rece ives it kn eelin g, an d evin cin g t h e profoundest recollection . Two m on ks con tem plate t h e scen efrom behin d t h e altar ; but t h e m os t charm in g figure i sthat of S . Hum ility , who , with features radian t with j oy ,like on e who sacrifices to God all that sh e holds m ostdear , stan ds with h er arm s cr osSed on h er bosom , an d

eyes r ai sed'

t o heaven im plorin g grace for h er con sort,

that h e m ay b e em powered to bear all t h e rigours ofm on astic life . Th e wan t of gracefuln ess i n t h e figure of

S . Hum ility i s am ply com pen sated by t h e tran slucen tdevotion which i s discern ible on t h e features of h er whom agn an im ously ren ounces all that was dearest to h erhere below .

3 44 ILLUSTRATIONS or PAINTING S

SOME PAINTINGS,

WHICH DECORATE A DEPOSITION FROM THE CROSS,

FRA G I OV A N N I A N G E L I C O D E L M U G E L L O .

THE marvellous revolution created by t h e genius of

Massacci o , m ay b e said to have superseded t h e sublim e

an d fertile school of Giotto . For fully a century an d a

half t h e latter ruled suprem ely over Italian Art an d,if

we except t h e schools of San zio an d t h e Caracci,there

n ever existed a sin gle on e which produced such gloriouspain t ers. It s forem ost m en were Taddeo Gaddi , An dreadi Cione Orgagn a, Buffalm acco , Spin ello di Arezzo ,Sim on e Mem m i di Sien a , an d Pie tro Cavalli n i of Rom e .

Whosoever would desire to con tem plate t h e m on um en tsof their glory, m ust visit t h e Cam posan to of Pisa , S .

Fran cesco of Assisi , S . Croce , an d S . Maria Novellai n Floren ce . But t h e n ew school , or , as it i s com m on lytermed , t h e School of t h e Na tur alis t s , excelled it i n t h estudy of t h e t r ue, in desrgn , chiaroscuro , an d per spec

tive , n ot to speak of t h e nude , lan dscape , or t h e varietyan d richness of orn amen tation . When , however , itbegan t o cultivat e pain tin g i n oil

, it sealed i t s trium ph ,an d cast t h e old school in to t h e shade .

Mean while an humble fii ar , faithful to t h e traditionsof Giotto , was cultivatin g t h e ar t of pain tin g i n t h e

Con ven t of S . Domen ico i n Fiesole . Con fi n i n g himself,however, to such an adoption of t h e n ew method as wassanction ed by t h e severe m axim s which h e professed, h e ,like many others , m ain tain ed that t h e style followed b yt h e old masters, i n all that regarded sacr ed pa i n t i n gfi vas

3 46 ILLUSTRAT IONS or PAINTING S

an d Feudal society made way for modern society . Nevert h eless , even after t h e lapse of four cen tur ies, an d n ot

withstanding t h e sublim est works of t h e various art istswho in te rven ed , t h e min d an d t h e heart must alwaysderive t h e swee test delight from t h e pain tin gs of t h e

Angelico . Like t h e history of our m isfortun es an d our

glories, they in variably brin g t h e tears to our eyes .

Th e six figures of which we m ean to speak , form par tof t h e rich ornamen tation of t h e Deposition fr om t h e

Cross. There ar e , altogether, twen ty figures i n thisorn am en tation , som e of which ar e half an d some whole ,exclusive of t h e three little h i stories on t h e cusps

,which

ar e usually attributed t o t h e mon k Lorenzo,who so

closely resembles t h e Angelico , as an artist as well as a

religious .

Th e S . Michele i s a figure , t h e terrible majesty ofwhose aspect remin ds us of t h e chief of t h e heaven lyhosts described by Milton . It som ewhat resemblesDon at ello

’

s S . Giorgio , but it h as less of t h e m ere m ortali n i ts characte r. Th e outlin es ar e rem arkable for theirsweetn ess : t h e perspective i s adm i rably m an aged

,an d thi s

proves that t h e An gelico , though h e m ay occasion allyseem n egligen t, was far fr om be in g ignoran t of t his mostessen tial departm en t of pain ting .

S . Pe t er i s represen ted con tem platin g that tragic sceneof t h e Deposition . Oh ! t h e piety , an d devotion of

that Apostle ’s features ! This m ost n oble figur e— t h e

prin ce of t h e Apostles an d Vicar of Chr ist—i s a mostnatural accessory t o t h e gran d subj ect which t h e

An gelico undertook to delin eate .

Af ter S . Peter com e S . Andrew an d S . Paul : t h eform er holds t h e cross , t h e latt er t h e sword , an d both t h ebook of t h e Gospels . For t h e preachin g of that wordwhich h as so marvellous ly exalt ed t h e human race , they

IN THE FLORENT INE ACADEMY . 34 7

both laid down their lives an d won t h e In ar tyr’

s palm .

Th e sacred pages record two m ost extraordin ary m en ;

Moses i n t h e old , an d Paul i n t h e n ew , law . Michelan giolo alon e was destin ed to sculpture t h e sem blan ce of

t h e Leader of t h e Israelites ; an d it would b e idle to hopethat an y artist can ever excel t h e A n gelico

’

s portrait ofS . Paul . Th e am ple forehead , flashin g eye , an d m ajesticbearin g of t h e An geli co

’

s Paul ,” rem i n d you at once of

t h e m an who fearlessly preached Christ on t h e Areopagus ;an d blen ched n ot when h e stood con fron tin g t h e execu

t ion er . In a word , Fr a Giovan n i h as im parted to thisfigure all t h e characteristics which we m ay learn of t h evessel of election ”

i n h i s epistles an d i n t h eApostolicActs .

Th e Apostle i s represen ted holdin g a sword, t h e poin t Of

which rests on t h e Sacred Volum e thus sign ifyin g thath e was prepared to prom ulgate i t s doctrin e s

, even at t h e

expen se of h i s blood . S . An drew , absorbed i n profoun dest grief, meditates this myst ery of love , an d seem s

yearn in g to sacrifice him self on t h e cross.

Then follow t h e figur es of t h e two great orat ors of

their age . S . Domin ic,Foun der of t h e Preachin g

Friars, an d S . Bern ardi n o da Sien a of t h e Min ors. Bothof these , i n the ir respective periods , preached t h e gospelw ith most sign al success . Th e on e throughout a greatpart of Europe , an d t h e other i n Italy . Although theywere n ot destin ed to shed their blood i n att estation of

t h e Christian Religion ,n o on e who con siders t h e di f ~

fi cult i es with which they h ad to cont en d , can assert thatt h e life of each was n ot a protr acted an d pain ful m ar

tyr dom .

All these figures ar e beautifully design ed an d coloured .

Th e man agem en t of t h e draperies an d t h e expr essi on

m ay b e described as truly adm irable .

Th e pain ting of t h e Deposition belon ged t o t h e church

3 48 ILLUSTRATIONS or PAINT ING S

of t h e Holy Trin ity ; an d it i s men tion ed by Vasarian d t h e Chron icle of t h e Con vent of S . Dom enico i nFiesole .

S . BARBERA,

A PAINTING ON PANEL,

C O S I M O R O S S E L L I .

ONE day when a party of Floren tin e pain ters, sculptors ,an d architect s were am usin g them selves, An drea Orgagn a ,w h o outshon e all t h e other cultivators of t h e three Sist erArts, asked t h e followi ng question — who , after Giotto ,should b e regarded as t h e gran dest Master ? Th e

opin i ons, as m ay b e expect ed in all such con troversies ,were vari ous an d con flictin g ; some main tain in g t h e

suprem acy for Cim abue ; whilst‘ others con ten ded for

Stefan o , Buff alm acco,n ay, an d even for m en of m in or

im portan ce . Taddeo Gaddi , aft e r havi n g heard t h e

opin ion s of t h e disputan ts , then gave expression to this

gseve r e but truthful sentim en t : Most certain ly they were”all most di stin guished pain te rs ; but this ar t i s an d h as '

been declin in g .

”1 Now , if in stead of m ootin g t h e question raised by Orgagn a fully a century before , i n

Floren ce , we were to go back to t h e days when SixtusIV. em ployed Botticelli , Ghirlan daio , Rosselli , D . Bar

t olom m eo di Ar ezzo, an d Luca di Corton a to pain t i nt h e Vatican , an d ask who was t h e ables t m aster afterMassaccio , I doubt m uch whether we could echo t h esevere sen ten ce pron oun ced by Gaddi . In fact , althoughw e adm it that t h e form er did m uch for t h e advancemen t

Fran co Sacchetti, Novella 1 3 6.

3 50 ILLUSTRAT IONS or PAINTING S , ETC .

ar e feeble i n design ,ign oble i n t h e expression of t h e

coun te n an ces , an d totally devoid of grace . Nevertheless,we can n ot but praise t h e style of t h e com position , whichi s characterised by t h e sobriety an d philosophy of t h eQuattrocen tisti ; an d t h e holy patron ess of military fortificat ion s, (un der whose patron age a n um ber of German sdevoted them se lves to pious practices i n Floren ce ,) possesses as m uch m aj esty of action an d features as am plycompen sate s for t h e defect of beauty . As to t h e figureof t h e mail-clad warrior , whom sh e tram ples un der h erfeet, we m ay Observe that it i s i n t h e symbolic style of t h eGreeks an d Giotteschi ; an d that t h e artist’s Object was tosign ify t h e trium ph of virtue over brute force . In our

judgm ent , t h e figure of t h e warrior i s design ed i n t h e

m ost perfect perspective . In st ead of makin g an y com

m en t on t h e two figures of S . John Bapti st an d S .

Mathias t h e Apostle , we will con ten t ourselves w ithrepeatin g Virgil’s adm on ition to Dan t e Look

, an d

pass on I”'

For fur ther par ticular s r egardin g t h e Legen d of S . Bar b er s , see Mrs.

Jam eson’

s beautiful work, “ Th e Poetry of Sacr ed an d Legen dary Ar t .”

DOCUMENTSTO ILLUSTRATE

THE MEMOIRS OF THE DOMINICAN ARTISTS .

BO OK I I .

PAGE 3 2 .

M iscellan ea, No. 2 1 vol. i n folio, MS .

(Archives of S . Marco.)Con tract between Fr a Bartolom m eo della Por ts. an d Mariotto Alb er t i n elli

,

by which t h e latter bin ds him self to adm in ister t h e property of Pietrodel Fattorin o, an d to teach h im t h e ar t of pain tin g.

Y H S (Jesus.)Jan uary 1 st , 1 505 . In t h e n am e of God an d of t h e glorious Virgin Mary

,

b e it kn own to all wh o w ill see or read these presen ts, that Fr a San ti ofLucca

, O. S . D. , an d n ow prior i n t h e con ven t of S . Marco i n Floren ce,h as

boun d Piero di Paolo t o Mar iotto, son of Biagio, for t h e term of six year s,com m en ci n g on t h e l st of Jan uary, 1 505 , an d term in atin g on t h e l s t ofJan uary, 1 5 1 1 . An d it i s agreed an d stipulated between said Prior an d saidMar iotto

,that t h e latter shall teach Pietro t h e ar t of pain tin g

,layin g on

gold, et c. an d that Pietr o shall, i n all thin gs, prove h i s obedien ce t o said

Mariotto,w ithout an y r em un eration or reward from said m aster durin g t h e

term of six years. An d t h e aforesaid parties ar e agreed that all t h e pr o~

perty in her ited by said Pietro from Paolo, son of Jacopo, (del Fattori n o,)shall b e adm in istered

,preserved, an d turn ed to t h e best advan tage by

Mariotto, wh o bin ds him self t o take diligen t care of said property ; provi di n g, like a good an d faithful adm in istrator, that i t shall sustai n n o detrim en t.All this property shall belon g to Mariotto durin g t h e t erm of S ix years ; an dh e shall b e e m pow ered to receive all i t s fruits an d r en ts dur in g said term .

Th e property i s herein after described, t o w i t“ A house situated i n t h e par ish of S. Pietro Gat t oli n i , an d a vin eyard,together with other pieces of arable groun d, i n sa id parish an d an other vin eyard, an d som e lots of groun d an d woods i n Val di Neve, together w ith on ehun dred a n d eleven fi or i n s, at seven per cen t. n ow in t h e ban k of t h e com

m un e of Floren ce.

3 52 DOCUMENT S To ILLUSTRATE THE

An d sa id Mariotto bi n ds him self t o lodge an d diet said Pietro i n h i sown house, an d to shoe an d clothe h im accordi n g t o h i s con di ti on . An d

provided Pietro should ask Mariotto for m on ey,h e shall n ot b e boun d to

advan ce h i m m ore than seve n soldi per m on th. But i n case Pietro shouldn ot ask h i m for m on ey

, said Mar iot to shall n ot b e boun d t o give it or tom ake i t good to h im a t t h e expiration of said term . Said Mariotto, m oreover, shal l b e boun d to have an offi ce celebrated for t h e repose of t h e soulof Paolo (del Fattorin o) each year i n t h e church of S . Pietro Gat t oli n i ; an dh e shall b e boun d to give t h e pr iest t h e sum of two l ire, an d t wo poun ds ofwax can dles, accordin g to an cien t usage. An d t h e aforesa id parties haveagreed that all t h e parties havin g cla im s on , or in debted to, sa id pr oper ty,shall apply to said Mariotto, i n order to receive what m ay b e due to them ,

or t o paywhat they m ay owe, accordin g to t h e pleasure of Mar iotto ; wh o, asa good an d faithful adm i n istrator, wi ll keep an accurat e accoun t of all paym en ts an d disbursem en ts , an d give satisfaction for sam e

,after t h e expir ation

of six years . An d they ar e also agr eed that Mariotto Shall receive as m uchm on ey from t h e debtors as m ay b e required for t h e clothin g of Pietro, t h eim provem en t Of h i s lan d

,an d t h e repairs of h i s house i n Val di Neve

An d i n case Mariotto should n ot b e ab le to raise so m uch m on ey asw oul d b e requi red for these purposes

,h e shall expen d thereon h is ow n m on ey,

for which h e Shall b e i n dem n ified at t h e term in ation of six years, as it shallseem good to t h e then Pr ior of S . Marco i n Floren ce An d i n case thatMar iotto or h i s heirs, should n ot thin k well of retain in g said Pietro, h e shallb e at liberty t o dism iss h im on t h e aforesaid con dition s ; an d should saidPietro w ish to leave t h e tutelage of Mariotto, or h is house , without com pletin gt h e ter m of s ix years, said Pietro sh all b e boun d t o in dem n ify Mariott oaccordin g t o t h e adjudication of whoever m ay b e t h e Pr ior of S . Mar co

i n Floren ce at t h e period. This provision h as been m ade lest Pietro shoul dm alig n sai d Mariotto, or have learn ed t h e ar t of pai n tin g too quickly ; for itis on ly just that said Mar iotto should b e in dem n ified for t h e tim e an d labourwhi ch h e un dertakes to devote t o teachi n g Pietr o. Moreover, sai d Pietr o,w ith t h e con sen t of sa id Pr ior, a n d i n presen ce of Fra Bartolom m eo, h isbrother, agrees , i n ca se h e should leave Mariotto, or h i s house, either beforeor after t h e expir ation of said term

, (six years,) that h e shall n ot b eem powered to let t h e vi n eyard, situate in Val di Neve, to an y other thansaid Mari otto, a t a r eason able valuation . An d i t i s provided also , th at i ncase h e Should b e d isposed to sell said vi n eyard

,h e Shall n ot b e em powere d

to sell it to an y other than t h e said Mariotto, for a sum to b e determ in ed byfour m en of t h e district. An d i n case Pietr o should di e without n atural orlegitim ate children , w ithin t h e term of six years, or after t h e expiration oft h e sam e, whosoever i n herits sai d vin eyar d shall b e boun d to sell it t oMar iotto or h i s heirs, for a reason able con sidera t ion . An d as to Mariott o an dh is heirs, should h e or they b e disin clin ed to purchase t h e sam e vin eyard

,it

3 54 DOCUMENT S To ILLUSTRATE THE

said Bern ardo com m ission ed Fr a Bart olom m eo to execute for t h e abbey ofFloren ce, on certain con dition s, which were set forth i n a private docum en tsubscribed by both parties. In fact

,they h ad agreed, that if they could n ot

com e to a m utual un derstan din g as to t h e pr i ce of said pictur e, t wo com m onfr ien ds Should b e appealed to ; an d i n case they did n ot m ake a satisfactoryarran gem en t, t h e whole m atter should b e subm itted to t h e Valuators ofAr t . Mean while, Fra Bar tolom m eo h ad received part of t h e sum agreedupon , an d as soon as t h e picture was fin ished, said Bern ar do began to raiseobjection s, n or could we i n duce h im t o advan ce t h e en tire am oun t, a s we h adhoped. Wherefore, havi n g referred t h e m atter t o t h e Prior, and taken t h eopin ion s of various per son s respecti n g t h e value of t h e work— for Fr a Bartolom m eo claim ed 2 00ducats, subm ittin g, however, that, if it so pleased t h e comm un ity

,h e would b e satisfied w ith 1 60, whereas, Bern ardo refused to give m ore

than 80— t h e whole dispute was subm itted to t h e Abbot for h is adj udication .

This arran gem en t was m ade,pr in cipally because said Bern ardo h ad been

r ef erred t o t h e friars, an d because h e was a person fon d of l itigation an d

cavillin g. He was desirous, m oreover, that t h e pain tin g should b e rem ovedfrom our house

,pen din g t h e arbitration , an d placed i n t h e abbey, or i n som e

third place. To this,our pain ter would n ot submit ; an d h e stated at t h e

sam e tim e,am on g other thin gs, that Bern ardo forfeited all claim to t h e

picture,a n d com prom ised h is hon our an d reputation . In fact, t h e whole

aff air was left i n t h e han ds of t h e Abbot, wh o cam e to speak to us about it,offer in g to settle t h e whole affa ir ; b ut , doubtless, w ith t h e view Of havin gt h e picture set up i n t h e chapel of t h e abbey, for which i t was destin ed. As

soon as we h ad given h im t h e n ecessary powers, h e proceeded to Bern ardo,an d cam e back to tel l us that h e did n ot fi n d Bern ardo disposed to com e in toour te r m s. Wherefore, quoth t h e abbot, adopt your own course, an d arran get h e m atter as you m ay thin k fi t . Now,

bein g obliged to go t o Ven ice atthis per iod, to con duct thither Martin o t h e Lector, an d also t o pur chasew oollen s

, t h e friars com m ission ed Fra Giovan n i de’ Medi ci an d N a N iccoloBartolo, to subm it t h e whole m atter to t h e Guild of Apothecar ies— t h e t r ibun al that was em powered to adjudicate on m atters of Ar t . T he Con sulsthereon referred t h e di spute to two com m on frien ds

,an d Bern ardo selected

Giovan n i di Piero di Giovan n i Fran ceschi ; an d t h e arbitrator chosen by uswas Mar iotto Alb er t i n elli . Havi n g lodged t h e am oun t payable for t h earbitration , accordin g to their statutes, Mar iotto was com m an ded to value sa idpicture

,an d to report thereon , all prohibition to t h e con trary n otwi t h s tan d

i n g. They cam e to n o decision , an d we got back t h e sum which h ad beendeposi ted.”

At page 3 2 of sa id Registry, we read On accoun t of t h e l itigation(m en t ion of which is m ade on t h e opposite page) con cern in g a pictureexecuted by our Fr a Bartolom m eo

,for Bern ardo del Bian co, our Prior an d

Fathers cam e to t h e con clusion , that t h e whole affair, in stead of be in g of

MEMOIRS OF THE DOMINICAN ART IST S . 3 55

use , in volved as i n serious loss, particularly as we were obliged to go to lawbefor e a secular tribun al, an d that for t h e sake of a m erely tem poral Object.Kn owin g that this Bern ardo was a very litigious pe r son , an d that t h e con

ven t was m uch i n debt ; an d , m oreover, that certain sum s of m on ey h ad beenadvan ced to t h e con ven t for said pain tin g

,it was resolved that we should

get r id of this an n oyan ce as soon a n d as'

well as we could. Wherefore, onm y retur n from Ven ice, t h e Prior, a t t h e in stan ce of som e of our Fathers,com m iss ion ed m e

,Father Ruberto

, t h e Syn dic, an d Father Giovan n i de’Medici

,t o subm it t h e m atter to t h e arbitration of Mariotto, t h e pain ter, an d

Giovan n i Fran ceschi. We were likew ise em powered to select t h e abbot oft h e Abbey of Floren ce. We

,therefore, adopted all these m easures on t h e

1 8 t h of Jun e. Bon ach orso, t h e n otary of t h e O ffi ce della Torre, was therein

i n structed t o act , after havin g obtain ed t h e con sen t of t h e said Bern ardo, wh o,sooth t o say, was very frien dly on t h e occasion .

Subsequen tly, however, t h e Abbot reported to Fra Giovan n i de’ Medici ,that h e would n ot receive an y i n form ation

,con cern in g t h e case i n dispute,

from an y pain ter o_

r valuator of Ar t . Thus,t h e opin ion s of t h e very pai n ter s

whom h e in vited t o give h im i n form ation , wen t for n othi n g, although theyh ad been to see t h e picture i n t h e con ven t. Fra Bartolom m eo, therefore, wasvery m uch pain ed that t h e Abbot should reject t h e decision of m en skilled i nar t , an d adopt that of person s wh o were n ot profession ally fit to pron oun ceon t h e sam e. Thin gs h ad gon e this len gt h, when Fr a Giovan n i told t h eAbbot

,very fam iliarly, by way of advice— take heed that you arbitrate

justly an d correctly ; an d if you b e n ot able to decide t h e m atter,refer it t o

t h e Valuators of Ar t , for you w ill n ot succeed i n satisfyin g either of t h eli tigan t pa rties. He stated

, m oreover, that Bern ardo was m or e disposed toabide by sen ten ce Of t h e Valuators of Ar t , than by that of t h e Abbot. At

all even ts, there was n o decision given , though t h e m atter h ad been pen di n g ti ll t h e 3 ot h of Jun e, 1 507 .

Wherefore, duri n g m y absen ce from Floren ce, t h e arbitration was abandoued. Havin g return ed on t h e 1 st of July, I was in form ed that t h e Abboth ad sen t for m e on t h e 3 ot h of Jun e ; an d, bein g com m ission ed by t h e Vicarof t h e con ven t, ( i n t h e absen ce of t h e Prior, wh o h ad set out for Rom e w itht h e Gen eral ,) an d accom pan ied by t h e aforesaid Giovan n i

,I proceeded to t h e

Abbot,w ith t h e in ten tion of ren ewin g t h e arbitration , i n com plian ce with

t h e r equest that h ad been m ade on t h e part of t h e Abbot, i n m y presen ce,by Giovan n i Fran ceschi, Loren zo di Credi , t h e pa in ter, an d Gher ard oGherardi. They, it should b e told, com m en ded Bern ardo t o our fr iar s, b ecause h e adjourn ed t h e heari n g of t h e case till such tim e as t h e Abbot coul dobtain certain in form ation , which h e was about to get . But t h e Abbot sen tus word that h e was en gaged

,that h e could n ot see us , that h e h ad sen t for

us t h e day before, an d that t h e tim e for com i n g to a decis ion h ad gon e byi n a word, that h e h ad n o further n eed of us. When t h e aforesaid Giovan n i

3 56 DOCUMENTS TO ILLUSTRATE THE

received this an swer, we r esolved on a n ew course ; an d i t was determ i n edthat Giovan n i an d Loren zo di Credi, t h e pai n ter, should com e to an agreem en t as to t h e value of t h e pictur e, an d without m en tion in g i t t o an y otherparty, should com m un icate w ith us. \Ve, therefore, professed our selvesw illi n g to ratify an d approve of the ir decis ion . Giovan n i thereon wen t tolook for sa id Loren zo, b ut they could n ot com e to an y agr eem en t

,as they

wer e preven ted from doi n g so by t h e laws that regulate A r t . Hen ce i t wasn ecessar y to apply to t h e Guild of Apothecar ies ; an d we sum m on ed s aid

Bern ardo ; an d t h e Con suls decreed that. we should subm it to t h e Valuatorsof Ar t . We then deposited fi ve ducats, i n com plian ce w ith t h e statuteen acted by t h e Guild ; b ut , see in g that i t did n ot becom e us, as religi ous, toappeal to a secular tribun al, t h e Syn dic of t h e con ven t an d Fran cescoMagalot t i , wh o was on e of our best ben efactors, an d a kin sm an of saidBer n ardo, adopted t h e advice of t h e Vicar-Gen eral, wh o, w ith t h e Prior an dFathers of t h e con ven t, decided that t h e whole m atter should b e referred tosa id Fran cesco Magalot t i . He succeeded i n i n ducin g Bern ardo t o give us

over an d above t h e forty ducats already paid, a further sum of sixty ducats,leavin g t h e rest t o t h e discretion an d good w ill of said Bern ardo. Wewer e

sati sfied ; an d sa idMagalot t i cam e to t h e con ven t on t h e 1 7th of July, aecompan ied by Giovan n i di Piero Fran ceschi. Th e latter then gave m e sixtygold ducats, an d took away t h e pain ti n g. Giovan n i de’ Medici got back t h edeposit, which rem a in ed i n t h e han ds of t h e Guild, after havin g paid t h evaluators t h e sum to whi ch they were en titled, as well as a sm all sum to t h eappren tices for their trouble. Thus , through t h e grace of God, t h e wholeaffa ir was m ost happily settled.

PAGE, 55 .

Ext r act f r om th e said Regis t ry.

FRA BARTOLOMMEO’

S APPEAL TO THE CONVENT OFMURANO IN VENICE, A. D. 1 5 1 1 .

Man y year s ago— I thi n k i t was i n t h e April of l5o8—Fr a Bartolom m eoour pain ter

,wen t to Ven ice, accom pan ied by t h e Syn dic of t h e con ven t of

S . Marco. At t h e i n stan ce of Bartolom eo dal Zan o, t h e Vicar Gen er al oft h e con ven t of S. Peter Martyr, of our Order, i n Muran o, h e un dertook topain t a picture on cloth , leavin g t h e value of said work, which cost h i m m uchtim e, to b e determ i n ed by two com m on fr ien ds. They told h i m , however,that t h e price of t h e picture should b e about seven ty or a hun dred ducats, or

3 58 DOCUMENT S TO ILLUSTRATE THE

Coun cil-Hal l. This order i s duly registered by t h e publi c n otary an d sa idsum i s to b e paid com e n ext October, 1 5 1 3 .

Th e sa id order was com m un ica ted to m e, Fr a Gerolam o Dan di Gin i,Syn dic an d Procurator of t h e con ven t

,on t h e 1 7th of Jun e, On t h e

1 9 t h of July said order was form ally sign ed by t h e clerks del Mon te, an d

their chan cellor.“ I t was subscr i bed, m oreover, by t h e Providor e of t h e Coun cil of Ten ,

an d by Giovan n i Masoli n i , on e of their officials."

PAGE 67 .

Copy of an i n s t r um en t drawn up at t h e dissolution of t h e partn ershipbetween Fr a Bartolom m eo an d Mar iotto Alb e r t i n elli

,pa in ters. This i n st ru

m en t was san ction ed by t h e Prior of S . Marco, as m ay b e seen by h is sub

scription thereto, an d also by a referen ce to t h e credit an d debit book of saidcon ven t.

“ Jan uary 5 , 1 5 1 2 . Th e un dersign ed, i . e. Fr a Bar t olom m eo t h e pai n ter,Fra San ti da Lucca, Prior of S. Marco, an d Mariotto Alb er t i n elli , haveagreed t o dissolve t h e partn ership hitherto existin g between sa id Fr a Bartolom m eo an d Mariotto. Moreover, said parties have con sen ted to m ake adivis ion of t h e colours an d other m atters perta in in g to their profession ; an dl ikewise of their pictures, whether fin ished or un fin ished, all Of which shallb e specified at foot of this . Said Fr a Bartol. a n d t h e Prior shall subscr ibe itw ith their own han ds . Th e pai n tin gs which have been m ade over to t h eCon ven t of S. Marco, ar e t h e follow in gA pai n ti n g on can vas, t h e dim en sion s of which ar e six braccia by four

,

Th e subject of said pain tin g i s a God t h e Father, w ith S. M. Magdale n e,

an d S . Catherin e of S ien a ; an d i t i s valued at sixty gold ducats. Afterdeductin g twen ty-eight ducats from this sum

, t h e con ven t shall receivethirty ducats. An d we ar e agreed that

,if said picture should b e sold for

m ore than sixty gold ducats, on e hal f of t h e en tire am oun t shall b e givento Mariotto, an d t h e other to our Friars. In case it b e n ot sold, it shallb e t h e property of said con ven t, ducats 3 2

A head of Christ, which was given by t h e Friar s to Lion ardo Bart oli n i ducats 4

A m edalli on of about t wo braccia, con ta in i n g a picture of t h e Na

t ivi ty, ducats 1 2Th e followi n g works Shall b e t h e property of Mariotto

A m edallion of about two braccia, ducats 1 7A Christ ca r ryin g t h e Cross, w ith t h e r obbers an d om am en t at ion , ducats 1 2Two pain tin gs of about on e an d a—half braccia each (fi n ished) , ducats 1 2An An n un ciation , n ow i n possession of t h e Gon falon ier, an d also a sm allpicture, ducats 6

He was elected Syn dic of t h e Con ven t of 8 . Mar co, May 3 1 , 1 51 3 .

MEMOIRS or THE DOMINICAN ARTI ST S . 3 59

We ar e also agreed that t h e works com m en ced an d n ot yet fin i shed, shouldb e divided between us ; an d we also agree that t h e follow in g shall belon g t ot h e Con ven t of S . Marco an d Fr a'Bartolom m eo t h e pain ter— i . e.

, t h e greatpai n tin g

,m ean t for t h e coun cil hall, which h as been design ed by sa id Fr a

Bartol .“We ar e also agreed that t h e un der-n am ed works, n ot yet fin ished, shall b egiven t o Mari otto i n lieu of t h e pain tin g m ean t for t h e coun cil hall, whichbelon gs t o t h e Con ven t of S . Marco—that i s t o say, a picture design ed byFr a Filippo, (perhaps Lippi,) th at was to b e placed i n t h e Certosa ofPavia— also an other picture design ed by Fr a Bartol . an d m ean t for saidCertosa— also an other work of about 2 braccia, together with a littlesketch by Fr a Bartol. of Adam sittin g an d Eve stan din g. Th e latter worki s about half a braccio. All these shall b e t h e property of Mariotto.

We agree,m oreover

,that all t h e im plem en ts an d n ecessar ies for pain ti n g,

which were com m on t o us bot h, shall belon g t o Fr a Bartolom m eo as lon g ash e l ives ; an d that after h i s death said im plem en ts an d n ecessaries shalldevolve on Mar iotto t h e pain ter , a n d h i s heirs. They ar e t h e followin g : a

m odel i n wood,life s ize an d also an other h i n ged m odel of about on e braccio

—a pair of iron com passes ; an d t h e m odel of a child i n plaster, m ade byDesiderio da Settign an o, t h e sculptor.

I, Fr a San ti da Lucca, prior of S . Marco, r atify an d approve t h e dissolution of t h e par tn ership between Fr a Bartol. a n d Mariotto t h e pai n ter. I

,

Fr a Bartol. ratify t h e foresa id arran gem en t, an d hereun to appen d m y sign ature. (Th e sign ature of Mariotto is wan tin g.)

VI.

PAGE 74.

THE RELIGIOUS OF S . MARCO PRESENT GIOVANNI BENINTENDI WITH A PAINTING‘BY FRA BARTOLOMMEO DELLA

PORTA,

On t h e 3 r d of Feb . 1 53 4, at t h e fir st hour of n ight,Father Fel ix, t h e

prior Of this con ven t, as sem bled t h e twen ty-eight vocals of said con ven t,an d they then an d there un an im ously pr esen ted to Giovan n i Ben i n ten di oft h e parish of S . Marco, Floren ce, on e picture by t h e han d of t h e distingui sh ed pai n ter , Fr a Bartolom m eo

, O. S . D. Said picturewas i n t h e wester nside of t h e chur ch Of S . Marco, an d it con tai n ed t h e effigy of S . Catherin e ofS ien a, together w ith portraits of various sain ts. Th e religious have freelybestowed i t on t h e said Giovan n i , an d t h e heirs of h i s house ; that h e an dthey m ay ador n i t as wi ll seem good to them ,

an d thus prom ote t h e hon or oft h e sa id S. Catherin e. This don ation h as been duly recorded by Bartolom eo de Azei s, a citizen an d n otary of Floren ce, on t h e 3 rd of Feb .

,

VII.

PAGE 9 1 .

CREDIT AND DEBIT BOOK OF THE HOSPICE OF S. M.

MAGDALENE IN PIAN DI MUGNONE.

In t h e n am e of God an d of t h e ever Glorious Virgi n Mary, an d of ourholy foun der! Messer S . Dom i n ic, an d of IWesser S . John Baptis t , an d oft h e wh ole heaven ly cour t— all of whom we beseech to give us stren gth ofbody an d soul.

“ July lot h , 1 5 1 4 , t h e Madon n a was pai n ted for t h e chapel.That i s to say, t h e Madon n a which i s at t h e foot of t h e stairs. It was

pain ted by Fr a Bartol . wh o was here for t h e recovery of h i s hea lth. He

brought with h im t wo pupils of h i s, wh o pa in t ed t h e histories of t h eHoly Fathers.

“An d on t h e 1 5 t h of said m on th,Fr a Bartol. pain ted t h e Madon n a for

t h e refectory of t h e i n firm . At this period Fr a Filippo Strozzi was prior ofS . Marco, an d E '

a An ton io D‘Ar adda was Vicar of S . M. Magdalen e.”

(Un der date 1 5 1 5 , we readTh e An n un ciation that i s on t h e arch of t h e pr esepi um , i s by t h e han d

of Fr a Bartolom m eo, wh o executed it on t h e 4 t h of October, 1 5 1 5 , un dersa id father s, an d at t h e expen se of Fr a Roberto Salviati."

VIII.PAGE 1 2 7.

NECROLOGY OF FRA BARTOLOMMEO.

An n a ls of t h e Con ven t of S . Mar co.

Fra Bartolom m eo of Floren ce, was pr ofessed i n t h e Con ven t of Prato ;an d h e was t h e m ost distin guished m an of h is age i n pa i n tin g an d perspective, as h i s m an y works attest. These m ay b e seen i n Rom e, Floren ce,Lucca an d Pi stoja. He also pain ted m an y pictur es which have b ee n sen ti n to Fran ce an d Flan ders. On h is return from t h e baths of S . Filippo h edied i n this con ven t Octob . 6 t h , 1 5 1 7. Th e dem ise of on e so far fam ed forh is pictor ial powers, was a great loss t o our com m un ity. He was a deacon ;an d died in h is forty-eight

Those wh o ar e fam i li ar with Ber ceo’s “Milagr os de Nuestr a Sen or a ,” will n otb e aston i shed at fin di n g S . Dom i n i c styledMesser ; des ign ati on s of thi s sort, howeve r ,wer e m uch m or e com m on i n Spai n t han elsewher e .

On t h e author ity of Vasar i , we have sai d that lir a Bar t ol. di ed, aged for t ye ight year s . Th e ch r on i cle of 8 . Mar co states that h e was n ot m or e than forty-s i xyear s ; b ut thi s is eviden tly an er r or , which was sub sequen tly can celled b y t h e m an

uen s i s, wh o for“ 6 ” sub sti tuted

3 62 DOCUMEN TS TO ILLUSTRATE THE

furn ished. In t h e cen tral gate there shall b e eight h istories, accordin g to t h ewax m odels n ow i n possession of said Father

,wh o will also execut e t h e

corn ices, fr iezes an d arm or ial devices,i n base -rel ieve . Th e histories shall b e

t h e followi n gTh e Nativity of t h e Madon n a .

Th e Pr es en tation of t h e sam e i n t h e tem ple.

Her Espousals w ith S . Joseph .

Th e An n un ciation .

Th e Visitation of S. Elizabeth .

Th e Purification in t h e Tem ple.

Her Assum ption in to heaven .

Her Coron ation i n heaven .

Th e two other gates shall also con ta in eight histories with decoration s;arm orial devices, et c.

, e t c. ; t h e followi n g ar e t h e subjects for t h e gatethat i s opposite t h e Cam po San toOur Lord’s Nativity.Hi s C ir cum cis ion .

Th e Adoration of t h e Magi .Th e Disputat ion with t h e Doctors .

Hi s Baptism by S. John .

Th e Expulsion of t h e Pharisees from t h e tem ple .

Th e Resurr ection of Lazarus .

Th e Lord’s tr ium phan t en try i n to Jerusalem .

Th e gate opposite t h e New Hospital shall con tain t h e followin gOur Lord prayin g i n t h e garden .

Th e Flagel lation .

Th e Crown in g with Thorn s.

Our Lord carryin g His Cross an d m eeti n g His Mother.Th e Crucifixion .

Our Lord Crucified between t h e two highwaym en .

Our Lord Expirin g on t h e Cross.Th e Burial of our Lord.F. Por t igian i un dertakes t o substitute for t h e ar m or ial devices which are

i n t h e cen tre of t h e m odel, Cherubim s an d Seraphim s ; an d h e prom ises toexecute t h e devices un der t h e architrave of said gates in t h e cen tre ; h ealso bin ds hi m self to execute t h e histories of t h e three gates in b ase-relieve .

Th e wax m odels shall b e furn ished by t h e best m asters, an d th eym ustb e approved by Gian Bologn a, Rafi

'

ael da Pagn o, t h e architect, or b y som eon e appoin ted for that purpose.

“ Said Father is boun d to com e with t h e gates to Pisa after they have beencast

,an d h e shall assistwhile they are bein g set up. Th e expen se con se

quen t on all this i s to b e paid by t h e superin ten den ts.

MEMOIRS OF THE DOMINICAN ART IST S . 3 63

Said super in ten den ts ar e boun d to provide F. Por t igian i with all n ecessar y accom m odation for castin g t h e gates i n Floren ce. They ar e also boun dto furn ish all m etal that shall b e requi r ed, in dem n ifyin g h i m at t h e rate oftenpe r cen t. for was te, as soon as said gates shall have been furn ished.Sai d gates shall b e well executed an d poli shed ; an d i n case an y question

should arise, t h e whole m atter shall b e referred to Gian Bologn a an d Raf

fael Pagn o, t h e architect.For t h e workm an ship of sa id gates t h e superin ten den ts shall b e boun d to

pay F. Por t igian i dollars ; an d for t h e n ext six m on ths they Shall b eboun d to pay h im five ducats per m on th. Aft er t h e expiration of this term ,

they shall pay h im i n proportion to t h e work that h e execut es each day.

As soon as t h e three gates are per fected, they shall liquidate wha t everclaim s said Father m ay have on them . Father Por t i gi an i un dertakes to deliver sai d gates t o t h e superin ten den ts w ith i n t h e term oft wo years, t h e fir st ofwhi ch is to com m en ce i n t h e May of t h e presen t year.Father Por t igian i an d Zan obi de Girolam o, h i s n ephew

,pledge them

selves t o t h e observan ce of all these stipulation s, an d t h e superin ten den ts oft h e Duom o of Pi sa, by virtue of t h e powers en trusted to them by h i s H ighn ess, bin d them selves to sai d Father, an d prom ise to carry out all that theyhave herein pr om ised . For t h e m ain ten an ce of all these stipulation s, theygive as security t h e said Duom o of Pisa ; b ut they ar e n ot t o b e boun d i ntheir own person al pr operty.

I, Fr a D. Por t igian i , bin d m yself to t h e ob servan ce of all that is hereincon tain ed , an d hereun to I appen d m y sign atur e.

I,Zan obi Por t igian i , pledge m yself to sam e arran gem en ts, an d subscribe

m y sign ature.

XI.

PAGE 2 84.

NECROLOGY OF FATHER DOMENICO PORTIGIANI.A n n a ls Q)

"th e con ven t of S . Mar co.

Father D. Por t igian i , a son of t his con ven t, an d a pr iest of God,was

r em arkable for h i s piety an d gr avity. Though n ot di stin guish ed i n li teratur eh e was gif ted with gr eat pruden ce, an d such was h i s sain tly character, thath e was chosen t o b e Master of Novices i n our con ven t. He was also ap

poin ted con fessor to t h e n un s of t h e Dom in ican Order. He for som e tim ewas Sub -Pr ior of thi s con ven t. While h e was a secular, h e lear n ed t h e ar tof castin g i n bron ze from h i s father, an d after takin g t h e habit, h e devotedm a n y hours to t h e study Of Vitruvius an d Leon Battista Alberti . In deed h e

3 64 DOCUMENT S To ILLUSTRATE , ETC .

took t h e greatest delight i n such studies, an d ul t im ately becam e on e of t h em ost distin guished cultivators of thi s ar t as well as of archi tecture whom our

age h as seen . His H ighn ess, our Duke,would have sen t h im to Prester

John , ( t h e Kin g of Ethiopia) i n order to teach h is subjects t h e ar t of casti n g i n bron ze, h ad our good Father con sen ted to t h e proposal.Father Por t igian i was highly distin guished as an arch itect, an d h e restored

m an y edi fices that were i n a r ui n ous con di tion , an d r ebuilt m an y other s. He

cast a great n um ber of ca n n o n s, bells , an d various adorn m en ts for edifices ,foun ta i n s an d aquaducts. He also ca st t h e beautiful basso-relievo ( i n bron ze)which m ay b e seen i n t h e chapel of S . A n ton in o i n t h e church of S. Marco .Le t us n o t forget t h e three beautiful gates whi ch, together w ith their sills an dim posts, h e cast for t h e cathedral of Pisa . He did n ot live to perfect them ,

b ut h e left a disciple wh o executed all our good Father desired, an d in scri b edh i s (Por t igian i

’

s) n am e thereon . Atten din g sedulously t o this work, an d

bein g con stan tly about t h e furn ace , (for h e took little care of him self ) h e

was seized wi th a violen t m alady which very soon con sign ed h im t o h i s

grave. Havin g devoutly received all t h e sacram en ts, h e died i n t h e 65 t h

year of h i s age, Feb . 5 t h , 1 601 . He lived 50 years i n Religion , an d i s

bur ied in our church .

”

THE END .

J . M. O ’TOOLE , Pr i n ter, 1 3 , Hawkin s’-st reet, Dublin .

Lives of the Most Eminent 143 Minim - Forgotten Books

Documents

Transcript of Lives of the Most Eminent 143 Minim - Forgotten Books