E-text prepared by Roy Brown
THE LIVES OF THE PAINTERS, SCULPTORS & ARCHITECTS
by
GIORGIO VASARI
In Eight Volumes
Vol. One
CONTENTS
CIMABUE (1240-1302)
ARNOLFO DI LAPO (1232-1310)
BONANNO (fl. 1174-1186
LAPO (1190-1260)
NICCOLA AND GIOVANNI PISANI fl 1205, 1278, 1250-1328)
ANDREA TAFI (1250-1320)
GADDO GADDI (1259-1333)
MARGARITONE (1210-1293)
GIOTTO (1267-1337)
PUCCIO CAPANNA (fl. 1350)
AGOSTINO AND AGNOLO (fl. 1286-1330)
STEFANO AND UGOLINO (1301-1350, 1260-1339)
PIETRO LAURATI (died c. 1350)
ANDREA PISANO (1270-1348)
BUONAMICO BUFFALMACCO (fl. 1311-1351)
AMBRUOGIO LORENZETTI (died c. 1338)
PIETRO CAVALLINI (1259-1334)
SIMONE MARTINI AND LIPPO MEMMI (1285-1344; died 1357)
PREFACE TO THE LIVES
I am aware that it is commonly held as a fact by most writers that
sculpture, as well as painting, was naturally discovered originally
by the people of Egypt, and also that there are others who attribute
to the Chaldeans the first rough carvings of statues and the first
reliefs. In like manner there are those who credit the Greeks with
the invention of the brush and of colouring. But it is my opinion
that design, which is the creative principle in both arts, came into
existence at the time of the origin of all things. When the Most High
created the world and adorned the heavens with shining lights, His
perfect intellect passing through the limpid air and alighting on the
solid earth, formed man, thus disclosing the first form of sculpture
and painting in the charming invention of things. Who will deny that
from this man, as from a living example, the ideas of statues and
sculpture, and the questions of pose and of outline, first took form;
and from the first pictures, whatever they may have been, arose the
first ideas of grace, unity, and the discordant concords made by the
play of lights and shadows? Thus the first model from which the first
image of man arose was a lump of earth, and not without reason, for
the Divine Architect of time and of nature, being all perfection,
wished to demonstrate, in the imperfection of His materials, what
could be done to improve them, just as good sculptors and painters
are in the habit of doing, when, by adding additional touches and
removing blemishes, they bring their imperfect sketches to such a
state of completion and of perfection as they desire. God also
endowed man with a bright flesh colour, and the same shades may be
drawn from the earth, which supplies materials to counterfeit
everything which occurs in painting. It is indeed true that it is
impossible to feel absolutely certain as to what steps men took for
the imitation of the beautiful works of Nature in these arts before
the flood, although it appears, most probable that even then they
practised all manner of painting and sculpture; for Bel, son of the
proud Nimrod, about 200 years after the flood, had a statue made,
from which idolatry afterwards arose; and his celebrated
daughter-in-law, Semiramis, queen of Babylon, in the building of that
city, introduced among the ornaments there coloured representations
from life of divers kinds of animals, as well as of herself and of
her husband Ninus, with the bronze statues of her father, her
mother-in-law, and her great-grandmother, as Diodorus relates,
calling them Jove, Juno, and Ops--Greek names, which did not then
exist. It was, perhaps, from these statues that the Chaldeans learned
to make the images of their gods. It is recorded in Genesis how 150
years later, when Rachel was fleeing from Mesopotamia with her
husband Jacob, she stole the idols of her father Laban. Nor were the
Chaldeans singular in making statues, for the Egyptians also had
theirs, devoting great pains to those arts, as is shown by the
marvellous tomb of that king of remote antiquity, Osimandyas,
described at length by Diodorus, and, as the severe command of Moses
proves, when, on leaving Egypt, he gave orders that no images should
be made to God, upon pain of death. Moses also, after having ascended
the Mount, and having found a golden calf manufactured and adored by
his people, was greatly troubled at seeing divine honours accorded to
the image of a beast; so that he not only broke it to powder, but, in
the punishment of so great a fault, caused the Levites to put to
death many thousands of the false Israelites who had committed this
idolatry. But as the sin consisted in adoring idols and not in making
them, it is written in Exodus that the art of design and of making
statues, not only in marble but in all kinds of metal, was given by
the mouth of God himself to Bezaleel, of the tribe of Judah, and to
Aholiab, of the tribe of Dan, who made the two cherubim of gold, the
candles, the veil, and the borders of the sacerdotal vestments,
together with a number of other beautiful things in the tabernacle,
for no other purpose than that people should put them on for their
own adornment and delight. From the things seen before the flood, the
pride of man found the means to make statues of those who wished
their fame in the world to be immortal; and the Greeks, who give a
different origin to this, say that the Ethiopians found the first
statues, according to Diodorus, the Egyptians imitated these, while
the Greeks followed the Egyptians. From this time until Homer's day
it is clear that sculpture and painting were perfect, as we may see
from the description of Achilles' shield by that divine poet, who
represents it with such skill that the image of it is presented to
our minds as clearly as if we had seen the thing itself. Lactantius
Firmianus attributes the credit of the invention to Prometheus, who
like God formed the human form out of dust. But according to Pliny
this art was introduced into Egypt by Gyges of Lydia, who on seeing
his shadow cast by the fire, at once drew a representation of himself
on the wall with a piece of coal. For some time after that it was the
custom to draw in outline only, without any colouring, Pliny again
being our authority. This was afterwards introduced by Philocles of
Egypt with considerable pains, and also by Cleanthes and Ardices of
Corinth and by Telephanes of Sicyon. Cleophantes of Corinth was the
first of the Greeks to use colours, and Apollodorus was the first to
introduce the brush. Polignotus of Thasos, Zeuxis and Timagoras of
Chalcis, Pythia and Aglaphon followed them, all most celebrated, and
after them came the renowned Apelles who was so highly esteemed and
honoured for his skill by Alexander the Great, for his wonderful
delineation of Calumny and Favour, as Lucian relates. Almost all the
painters and sculptors were of high excellence, being frequently
endowed by heaven, not only with the additional gift of poetry, as
we read in Pacuvius, but also with that of philosophy. Metrodorus is
an instance in point, for he was equally skilled as a philosopher and
as a painter, and when Apelles was sent by the Athenians to Paulus
Emilius to adorn his triumph he remained to teach philosophy to the
general's sons. Sculpture was thus generally practised in Greece,
where there flourished a number of excellent artists, among them
being Phidias of Athens, Praxiteles and Polycletus, very great
masters. Lysippus and Pyrgoteles who were of considerable skill in
engraving, and Pygmalion in ivory carving in relief, it being
recorded of him that he obtained life by his prayers for the figure
of a maid carved by him. The ancient Greeks and Romans also honoured
and rewarded painting, since they granted the citizenship and very
liberal gifts to those who excelled in this art. Painting flourished
in Rome to such an extent that Fabius gave a name to his house,
subscribing himself in the beautiful things he did in the temple of
safety as Fabius the painter. By public decree slaves were prohibited
from practising painting, and so much honour was continually afforded
by the people to the art and to artists that rare works were sent to
Rome among the spoils to appear in the triumphs; excellent artists
who were slaves obtained their liberty and received notable rewards
from the republic. The Romans bore such a reverence for the art that
when the city of Syracuse was sacked Marcellus gave orders that his
men should treat with respect a famous artist there, and also that
they should be careful not to set fire to a quarter in which there
was a very fine picture. This was afterwards carried to Rome to adorn
his triumph. To that city in the course of time almost all the spoils
of the world were brought, and the artists themselves gathered there
beside these excellent works. By such means Rome became an
exceedingly beautiful city, more richly adorned by the statues of
foreign artists than by those made by natives. It is known that in
the little island city of Rhodes there were more than 30,000 statues,
in bronze and marble, nor did the Athenians possess less, while those
of Olympus and Delphi were more numerous still, and those of Corinth
were without number, all being most beautiful and of great price.
Does not every one know how Nicomedes, king of Lycia, expended almost
all the wealth of his people owing to his passion for a Venus by the
hand of Praxiteles? Did not Attalus do the same? who without an
afterthought expended more than 6000 sesterces to have a picture of
Bacchus painted by Aristides. This picture was placed by Lucius
Mummius, with great pomp to adorn Rome, in the temple of Ceres. But
although the nobility of this art was so highly valued, it is
uncertain to whom it owes its origin. As I have already said, it is
found in very ancient times among the Chaldeans, some attribute the
honour to the Ethiopians, while the Greeks claim it for themselves.
Besides this there is good reason for supposing that the Tuscans may
have had it earlier, as our own Leon Batista Alberti asserts, and
weighty evidence in favour of this view is supplied by the marvellous
tomb of Porsena at Chiusi, where not long ago some tiles of
terracotta were found under the ground, between the walls of the
Labyrinth, containing some figures in half-relief, so excellent and
so delicately fashioned that it is easy to see that art was not in
its infancy at that time, for to judge by the perfection of these
specimens it was nearer its zenith than its origin. Evidence to the
same purport is supplied every day by the quantity of pieces of red
and black Aretine vases, made about the same time, to judge by the
style, with light carvings and small figures and scenes in
bas-relief, and a quantity of small round masks, cleverly made by the
masters of that age, and which prove the men of the time to have been
most skilful and accomplished in that art. Further evidence is
afforded by the statues found at Viterbo at the beginning of the
pontificate of Alexander VI., showing that sculpture was valued and
had advanced to no small state of perfection in Tuscany. Although the
time when they were made is not exactly known, yet from the style of
the figures and from the manner of the tombs and of the buildings, no
less than by the inscriptions in Tuscan letters, it may be
conjectured with great reason that they are of great antiquity, and
that they were made at a time when such things were highly valued.
But what clearer evidence can be desired than the discovery made in
our own day in the year 1554 of a bronze figure representing the
Chimæra of Bellerophon, during the excavation of the fortifications
and walls of Arezzo. This figure exhibits the perfection of the art
attained by the Tuscans. Some small letters carved on a paw are
presumed, in the absence of a knowledge of the Etruscan language, to
give the master's name, and perhaps the date. This figure, on account
of its beauty and antiquity, has been placed by Duke Cosimo in a
chamber in his palace in the new suite of rooms which contains my
paintings of the deeds of Pope Leo X. The Duke also possesses a
number of small bronze figures which were found in the same place.
But as the antiquity of the works of the Greeks, Ethiopians,
Chaldeans, and Tuscans is enveloped in darkness, and because it is
necessary in such matters to base one's opinions on conjectures,
although these are not so ill founded that one is in danger of going
very far astray, yet I think that anyone who will take the trouble to
consider the matter carefully will arrive at the same conclusion as I
have, that art owes its origin to Nature herself, that this beautiful
creation the world supplied the first model, while the original
teacher was that divine intelligence which has not only made us
superior to the other animals, but like God Himself, if I may venture
to say it. In our own time it has been seen, as I hope to show quite
shortly, that simple children, roughly brought up in the woods, have
begun to draw by themselves aided by the vivacity of their intellect,
instructed solely by the example of these beautiful paintings and
sculptures of Nature. Much more then is it probable that the first
men, being less removed from their divine origin, were more perfect,
possessing a brighter intelligence, and that with Nature as a guide,
a pure intellect for master, and the lovely world as a model, they
originated these noble arts, and by gradually improving them brought
them at length, from small beginnings, to perfection. I do not deny
that there must have been an originator, since I know quite well that
there must have been a beginning at some time, due to some
individual. Neither will I deny that it is possible for one person
to help another, and to teach and open the way to design, colour, and
relief, because I know that our art consists entirely of imitation,
first of Nature, and then, as it cannot rise so high of itself, of
those things which are produced from the masters with the greatest
reputation. But I will say that an attempt to determine the exact
identity of such men is a very dangerous task, and the knowledge when
gained would probably prove unprofitable, since we have seen the true
and original root of all. But the life and fame of artists depend
upon their works which are destroyed by time one after the other in
the order of their creation. Thus the artists themselves are unknown
as there was no one to write about them and could not be, so that
this source of knowledge was not granted to posterity. But when
writers began to commemorate things made before their time, they were
unable to speak of those of which they had seen no notice, so that
those who came nearest to these were the last of whom no memorial
remains. Thus Homer is by common consent admitted to be the first of
the poets, not because there were none before him, for there were
although they were not so excellent, and in his own works this is
clearly shown, but because all knowledge of these, such as they were,
had been lost two thousand years before. But we will now pass over
these matters which are too vague on account of their antiquity and
we will proceed to deal with clearer questions, namely, the rise of
the arts to perfection, their decline and their restoration or rather
renaissance, and here we stand on much firmer ground. The practice of
the arts began late in Rome, if the first figures were, as reported,
the image of Ceres made of the money of Spurius Caasius, who was
condemned to death without remorse by his own father, because he was
plotting to make himself king. But although the arts of painting and
sculpture continued to flourish until the death of the last of the
twelve Cæsars, yet they did not maintain that perfection and
excellence which had characterised them before, as is seen as seen in
the buildings of the time. The arts declined steadily from day to
day, until at length by a gradual process they entirety lost all
perfection of design. Clear testimony to this is afforded by the
works in sculpture and architecture produced in Rome in the time of
Constantine, notably in the triumphal arch made for him by the Roman
people at the Colosseum, where we see, that for lack of good masters
not only did they make use of marble works carved in the time of
Trajan, but also of spoils brought to Rome from various places. These
bas-reliefs, statues, the columns, the cornices and other ornaments
which belong to another epoch only serve to expose the defects in
those parts of the work which are entirely due to the sculptors of
the day and which are most rude. Very rude also are some scenes of
small figures in marble under the circles and the pediment,
representing victories, while between the side arches there are some
rivers also very crude and so poor that they leave one firmly under
the impression that the art of sculpture had been in a state of
decadence for a long while. Yet the Goths and the other barbarous and
foreign nations who combined to destroy all the superior arts in
Italy had not then appeared. It is true that architecture suffered
less than the other arts of design. The bath erected by Constantine
at the entrance of the principal portico of the Lateran contains, in
addition to its porphyry columns, capitals carved in marble and
beautifully carved double bases taken from elsewhere, the whole
composition of the building being very well ordered. On the other
hand, the stucco, the mosaic and some incrustations of the walls made
by the masters of the time are not equal to those which had been
taken away for the most part from the temples of the gods of the
heathen, and which Constantine caused to be placed in the same
building. Constantine observed the same methods, according to report,
with the garden of Æquitius in building the temple which he
afterwards endowed and gave to Christian priests. In like manner the
magnificent church of S. John Lateran, built by the same emperor, may
serve as evidence of the same fact, namely, that sculpture had
already greatly declined in his time, because the figures of the
Saviour and of the twelve apostles in silver, which he caused to be
made, were very base works, executed without art and with very little
design. In addition to this, it is only necessary to examine the
medals of this emperor, and other statues made by the sculptors of
his day, which are now at the Capitol, to clearly perceive how far
removed they are from the perfection of the medals and statues of the
other emperors, all of which things prove that sculpture had greatly
declined long before the coming of the Goths to Italy. Architecture,
as I have said, maintained its excellence at a higher though not at
the highest level. Nor is this a matter for surprise, since large
buildings were almost entirely constructed of spoils, so that it was
easy for the architects to imitate the old in making the new, since
they had the former continually before their eyes. This was an easier
task for them than far the sculptors, as the art of imitating the
good figures of the ancients had declined. A good illustration of the
truth of this statement is afforded by the church of the chief of the
apostles in the Vatican, which is rich in columns, bases, capitals,
architraves, cornices, doors and other incrustations and ornaments
which were all taken from various places and buildings, erected
before that time in very magnificent style. The same remarks apply to
S. Croce at Jerusalem, which Constantine erected at the entreaty of
his mother, Helena; of S. Lorenzo outside the wall, and of S. Agnesa,
built by the same emperor at the request of his daughter Constance.
Who also is not aware that the font which served for the baptism of
the latter and of one of her sisters, was ornamented with fragments
of great antiquity? as were the porphyry pillar carved with beautiful
figures and some marble candelabra exquisitely carved with leaves,
and some children in bas-relief of extraordinary beauty? In short, by
these and many other signs, it is clear that sculpture was in
decadence in the time of Constantine, and with it the other superior
arts. If anything was required to complete their ruin it was supplied
by the departure of Constantine from Rome when he transferred the
seat of government to Byzantium, as he took with him to Greece not
only all the best sculptors and other artists of the age, such as
they were, but also a quantity of statues and other beautiful works
of sculpture.
After the departure of Constantine, the Caesars whom he left in
Italy, were continually building in Rome and elsewhere, endeavouring
to make these works as good as possible, but as we see, sculpture,
painting and architecture were steadily going from bad to worse. This
arose perhaps from the fact that when human affairs begin to decline,
they grow steadily worse until the time comes when they can no longer
deteriorate any further. In the time of Pope Liberius the architects
of the day took considerable pains to produce a masterpiece when they
built S. Maria Maggiore, but they were not very happy in the result,
because although the building, which is also mostly constructed of
spoils, is of very fair proportions, it cannot be denied that, not to
speak of other defects, the decoration of the church with stucco and
painting above the columns is of very poor design, and that many
other things to be seen there leave no doubt as to the degradation of
the arts. Many years later, when the Christians were suffering
persecution under Julian the Apostate, a church was erected on the
Celian Hill to SS. John and Paul, the martyrs, in so inferior a style
to the others mentioned above that it is quite clear that at that
time, art had all but entirely disappeared. The edifices erected in
Tuscany at the same time bear out this view to the fullest extent.
The church outside the walls of Arezzo, built to St Donato, bishop of
that city, who suffered martyrdom with Hilarion the monk, under the
same Julian the Apostate, is in no way superior to the others, and
this is only one of many. It cannot be contended that such a state of
affairs was due to anything but the lack of good architects, since
the church in question, which is still standing, has eight sides, and
was built of the spoils of the theatre, colosseum and other buildings
erected in Arezzo before it was converted to the Christian faith. No
expense has been spared, its columns being of granite and porphyry
and variegated marble which, had formerly adorned the ancient
buildings. For my own part, I have no doubt, seeing the expense
incurred, that if the Aretines had been able to employ better
architects they would have produced something marvellous, since what
they actually accomplished proves that they spared themselves nothing
in order to make this building as magnificent and complete as
possible. But as architecture had lost less of its excellence than
the other arts, as I have often said before, some good things may be
seen there. At the same period the church of S. Maria in Grado was
enlarged in honour of St Hilarion, who had lived in the city a long
time before he accompanied Donato to receive the palm of martyrdom.
But as Fortune, when she has brought men to the top of the wheel,
either for amusement or because she repents, usually turns them to
the bottom, it came to pass after these things that almost all the
barbarian nations rose in divers parts of the world against the
Romans, the result being the abasement of that great empire in a
short time, and the destruction of everything, notably of Rome
herself. That fall involved the complete destruction of the most
excellent artists, sculptors, painters and architects who abandoned
their profession and were themselves buried and submerged under the
debris and ruins of that most celebrated city. The first to go were
painting and sculpture, as being arts which served rather for
pleasure than for utility, the other art, namely architecture, being
necessary and useful for the welfare of the body, continued in use,
but not in its perfection and purity. The very memory of painting and
sculpture would have speedily disappeared had they not represented
before the eyes of the rising generation, the distinguished men of
another age. Some of them were commemorated by effigies and by
inscriptions placed on public and private buildings, such as
amphitheatres, theatres, baths, aqueducts, temples, obelisks,
colosseums, pyramids, arches, reservoirs and treasuries, yes, and
even on the very tombs. The majority of these were destroyed and
obliterated by the barbarians, who had nothing human about them but
their shape and name. Among others there were the Visigoths, who
having made Alaric their king, invaded Italy and twice sacked Rome
without respect for anything. The Vandals who came from Africa with
Genseric, their king, did the like. But he, not content with his
plunder and booty and the cruelties he inflicted, led into servitude
the people there, to their infinite woe, and with them Eudoxia the
wife of the Emperor Valentinian, who had only recently been
assassinated by his own soldiers. These men had greatly degenerated
from the ancient Roman valour, because a great while before, the best
of them had all gone to Constantinople with the Emperor Constantine,
and those left behind were dissolute and abandoned. Thus true men and
every sort of virtue perished at the same time; laws, habits, names
and tongues suffered change, and these varied misfortunes,
collectively and singly, debased and degraded every fine spirit and
every lofty soul. But the most harmful and destructive force which
operated against these fine arts was the fervent zeal of the new
Christian religion, which, after long and sanguinary strife, had at
length vanquished and abolished the old faith of the heathen, by
means of a number of miracles and by the sincerity of its acts. Every
effort was put forth to remove and utterly extirpate the smaller
things from which errors might arise, and thus not only were the
marvellous statues, sculptures, paintings, mosaics and ornaments of
the false pagan gods destroyed and thrown down, but also the
memorials and honours of countless excellent persons, to whose
distinguished merits statues and other memorials had been set up by a
most virtuous antiquity. Besides all this, in order to build churches
for the use of the Christians, not only were the most honoured
temples of the idols destroyed, but in order to ennoble and decorate
S. Peter's with more ornaments than it then possessed, the mole of
Hadrian, now the castle of S. Angelo, was despoiled of its stone
columns, as well as of many other things which are now seen in ruins.
Now, although the Christian religion did not act thus from any hatred
for talent, but only because of its contempt for the heathen gods,
yet the utter ruin of these honourable professions, which entirely
lost their form, was none the less entirely due to this burning zeal.
That nothing might be wanting to these grave disasters there followed
the rage of Totila against Rome, who destroyed the walls, ruined all
the most magnificent and noble buildings with fire and sword, burned
it from one end to another, and having stripped it of every living
creature left it a prey to the flames, so that for the space of
eighteen days not a living soul could be found there. He utterly
destroyed the marvellous statues, paintings, mosaics and stuccos, so
that he left Rome not only stripped of every trace of her former
majesty, but destitute of shape and life. The ground floors of the
palaces and other building had been adorned with paintings, stuccos
and statues, and these were buried under the debris, so that many
good things have come to light in our own day. Those who came after,
judging everything to be ruined, planted vines over them so that
these ruined chambers remained entirely underground, and the moderns
have called them grottos and the paintings found there grotesques.
The Ostrogoths being exterminated by Narses, the ruins of Rome were
inhabited in a wretched fashion when after an interval of a hundred
years there came the Emperor Constans of Constantinople, who was
received in a friendly manner by the Romans. However he wasted,
plundered and carried away everything that had been left in the
wretched city of Rome, abandoned rather by chance than by the
deliberate purpose of those who had laid it waste. It is true that
he was not able to enjoy this booty, for being driven to Sicily by a
storm at sea, he was killed by his followers, a fate he richly
deserved, and thus lost his spoils, his kingdom and his life. But as
if the troubles of Rome had not been sufficient, for the things which
had been taken away could never return, there came an army of
Saracens to ravage that island, who carried away the property of the
Sicilians and the spoils of Rome to Alexandria, to the infinite shame
and loss of Italy and of all Christendom. Thus what the popes had not
destroyed, notably St Gregory, who is said to have put under the ban
all that remained of the statues and of the spoils of the buildings,
finally perished through the instrumentality of this traitorous
Greek. Not a trace or a vestige of any good thing remained, so that
the generations which followed being rough and material, particularly
in painting and sculpture, yet feeling themselves impelled by nature
and inspired by the atmosphere of the place, set themselves to
produce things, not indeed according to the rules of art, for they
had none, but as they were instructed by their own intelligence.
The arts of design having arrived at this pitch, both before and
during the time that the Lombards ruled Italy, they subsequently grew
worse and worse, until at length they reached the lowest depths of
baseness. An instance of their utter tastelessness and crudeness may
be seen in some figures over the door in the portico of S. Peter's at
Rome, in memory of some holy fathers who had disputed for Holy Church
in certain councils. Further evidence is supplied by a number of
examples in the same style in the city and in the whole of the
Exarchate of Ravenna, notably some in S. Maria Rotonda outside that
city, which were made shortly after the Lombards were driven from
Italy. But I will not deny that there is one very notable and
marvellous thing in this church, and that is the vault or cupola
which covers it, which is ten braccia across and serves as the roof
of the building, and yet is of a single piece and so large that it
appears impossible that a stone of this description, weighing more
than 200,000 pounds, could be placed so high up. But to return to our
point, the masters of that day produced nothing but shapeless and
clumsy things which may still be seen to-day. It was the same with
architecture, for it was necessary to build, and as form and good
methods were lost by the death of good artists and the destruction of
good buildings, those who devoted themselves to this profession built
erections devoid of order or measure, and totally deficient in grace,
proportion or principle. Then new architects arose who created that
style of building, for their barbarous nations, which we call German,
and produced some works which are ridiculous to our modern eyes, but
appeared admirable to theirs. This lasted until a better form
somewhat similar to the good antique manner was discovered by better
artists, as is shown by the oldest churches in Italy which are not
antique, which were built by them, and by the palaces erected for
Theoderic, King of Italy, at Ravenna, Pavia, and Modena, though the
style is barbarous and rather rich and grand than well conceived or
really good. The same may be said of S. Stefano at Rimini and of S.
Martino at Ravenna, of the church of S. Giovanni Evangelista in the
same city built by Galla Placida about the year of grace 438, of S.
Vitale which was built in the year 547, and of the abbey of Classi di
fuori, and indeed of many other monasteries and churches built after
the time of the Lombards. All these buildings, as I have said, are
great and magnificent, but the architecture is very rude. Among them
are many abbeys in France built to S. Benedict and the church and
monastery of Monte Casino, the church of S. Giovanni Battista built
by that Theodelinda, Queen of the Goths, to whom S. Gregory the Pope
wrote his dialogues. In this place that queen caused the history of
the Lombards to be painted. We thus see that they shaved the backs of
their heads, and wore tufts in front, and were dyed to the chin.
Their clothes were of broad linen, like those worn by the Angles and
Saxons, and they wore a mantle of divers colours; their shoes were
open to the toes and bound above with small leather straps. Similar
to the churches enumerated above were the church of S. Giovanni,
Pavia, built by Gundiperga, daughter of Theodelinda, and the church
of S. Salvatore in the same city, built by Aribert, the brother of
the same queen, who succeeded Rodoaldo, husband of Gundiberta, in the
government; the church of S. Ambruogio at Pavia, built by Grimoald,
King of the Lombards, who drove from the kingdom Aribert's son
Perterit. This Perterit being restored to his throne after
Grimoald's death built a nunnery at Pavia called the Monasterio
Nuovo, in honour of Our Lady and of St Agatha, and the queen built
another dedicated to the Virgin Mary in Pertica outside the walls.
Cunibert, Perterit's son, likewise built a monastery and church to St
George called di Coronato, in a similar style, on the spot where he
had won a great victory over Alahi. Not unlike these was the church
which the Lombard king Luit-prand, who lived in the time of King
Pepin, the father of Charlemagne, built at Pavia, called S. Piero, in
Cieldauro, or that which Desiderius, who succeeded Astolf, built to
S. Piero Clivate in the diocese of Milan; or the monastery of S.
Vincenzo at Milan, or that of S. Giulia at Brescia, because all of
them were very costly, but in a most ugly and rambling style. In
Florence the style of architecture was slightly improved somewhat
later, the church of S. Apostolo built by Charlemagne, although
small, being very beautiful, because the shape of the columns,
although made up of pieces, is very graceful and beautifully made,
and the capitals and the arches in the vaulting of the side aisles
show that some good architect was left in Tuscany, or had arisen
there. In fine the architecture of this church is such that Pippo di
Ser Brunnellesco did not disdain to make use of it as his model in
designing the churches of S. Spirito and S. Lorenzo in the same city.
The same progress may be noticed in the church of S. Mark's at
Venice, not to speak of that of S. Giorgio Maggiore erected by
Giovanni Morosini in the year 978. S. Mark's was begun under the Doge
Giustiniano and Giovanni Particiaco next to S. Teodosio, when the
body of the Evangelist was brought from Alexandria to Venice. After
the Doge's palace and the church had suffered severely from a series
of fires, it was rebuilt upon the same foundations in the Byzantine
style as it stands to-day, at a great cost and with the assistance
of many architects, in the time of the Doge Domenico Selvo, in the
year 973, the columns being brought from the places where they could
be obtained. The construction was continued until the year 1140, M.
Piero Polani being then Doge, from the plans of several masters who
were all Greeks, as I have said. Erected at the same time, and also
in the Byzantine style, were the seven abbeys built in Tuscany by
Count Hugh, Marquis of Brandenburg, such as the Badia of Florence,
the abbey of Settimo, and the others. All these structures and the
vestiges of others which are not standing bear witness to the fact
that architecture maintained its footing though in a very bastard
form far removed from the good antique style. Further evidence is
afforded by a number of old palaces erected in Florence in Tuscan
work after the destruction of Fiesole, but the measurements of the
doors and the very elongated windows and the sharp-pointed arches
after the manner of the foreign architects of the day, denote some
amount of barbarism. In the year after 1013 the art appears to have
received an access of vigour in the rebuilding of the beautiful
church of S. Miniato on the Mount in the time of M. Alibrando,
citizen and bishop of Florence, for, in addition to the marble
ornamentation both within and without, the façade shows that the
Tuscan architects were making efforts to imitate the good ancient
order in the doors, windows, columns, arches and cornices, so far as
they were able, having as a model the very ancient church of S.
Giovanni in their city. At the same period, pictorial art, which had
all but disappeared, seems to have made some progress, as is shown by
a mosaic in the principal chapel of the same church of S. Miniato.
From such beginnings design and a general improvement in the arts
began to make headway in Tuscany, as in the year 1016 when the Pisans
began to erect their Duomo. For in that time it was a considerable
undertaking to build such a church, with its five aisles and almost
entirely constructed of marble both inside and out. This church,
built from the plans and under the direction of Buschetto, a clever
Greek architect from Dulichium, was erected and adorned by the Pisans
when at the zenith of their power with an endless quantity of spoils
brought by sea from various distant parts, as the columns, bases,
capitals, cornices and other stones there of every description, amply
demonstrate. Now since all these things were of all sizes, great,
medium, and small, Buschetto displayed great judgment in adapting
them to their places, so that the whole building is excellently
devised in every part, both within and without. Amongst other things
he devised the façade, which is made up of a series of stages,
gradually diminishing toward the top and consisting of a great number
of columns, adorning it with other columns and antique statues. He
carried out the principal doors of that façade in the same style,
beside one of which, that of the Carroccio, he afterwards received
honourable burial, with three epitaphs, one being in Latin verse, not
unlike other things of the time:
_Quod vix mille boum possent juga juncta movere
Et quod vix potuit per mare ferre ratis
Buschetti nisu, quod erat Mirabile visu
Dena puellarum turba levavit onus._
As I have mentioned the church of S. Apostolo at Florence above, I
will here give an inscription which may be read on a marble slab on
one of the sides of the high altar, which runs:
VIII. v. Die vi. Aprilis in resurrectione Domini Karolus Francorum
Rex Roma revertens, ingressus Florentiam cum magno gaudio et
tripudio succeptus, civium copiam torqueis aureis decoravit.
Ecclesia Sanctorum Apostolorum in altari inclusa est laminea
plumbea, in qua descripta apparet praefacta fundatio et consecratio
facta per Archiepiscopum Turpinum, testibus Rolando et Uliverio.
The edifice of the Duomo at Pisa gave a new impulse to the minds of
many men in all Italy, and especially in Tuscany, and led to the
foundation in the city of Pistoia in 1032 of the church of S. Paolo,
in the presence of S. Atto, the bishop there, as a contemporary deed
relates, and indeed of many other buildings, a mere mention of which
would occupy too much space.
I must not forget to mention either, how in the course of time the
round church of S. Giovanni was erected at Pisa in the year 1060,
opposite the Duomo and on the same piazza. A marvellous and almost
incredible statement in connection with this church is that of an
ancient record in a book of the Opera of the Duomo, that the columns,
pillars and vaulting were erected and completed in fifteen days and
no more. The same book, which may be examined by any one, relates
that an impost of a penny a hearth was exacted for the building of
the temple, but it does not state whether this was to be of gold or
of base metal. The same book states that there were 34,000 hearths in
Pisa at that time. It is certain that the work was very costly and
presented formidable difficulties, especially the vaulting of the
tribune, which is pear-shaped and covered outside with lead. The
exterior is full of columns, carving, scenes, and the middle part of
the frieze of the doorway contains figures of Christ and the twelve
apostles in half-relief and in the Byzantine style.
About the same time, namely in 1061, the Lucchese, in emulation of
the Pisans, began the church of S. Martino at Lucea, from the designs
of some pupils of Buschetto, there being no other artists then in
Tuscany. The façade has a marble portico in front of it containing
many ornaments and carvings in honour of Pope Alexander II., who had
been bishop of the city just before he was raised to the pontificate.
Nine lines in Latin relate the whole history of the façade and of the
Pope, repeated in some antique letters carved in marble inside the
doors of the portico. The façade also contains some figures and a
number of scenes in half-relief below the portico relating to the
life of St Martin executed in marble and in the Byzantine style. But
the best things there, over one of these doors, were done by Niccola
Pisano, 170 years later, and completed in 1233, as will be related in
the proper place, Abellenato and Aliprando being the craftsmen at the
beginning, as some letters carved in marble in the same place fully
relate. The figures by Niccola Pisano show to what an extent the art
was improved by him. Most of the buildings erected in Italy from this
time until the year 1250 were similar in character to these, for
architecture made little or no apparent progress in all these years,
but remained stationary, the same rude style being retained. Many
examples of this may be seen to-day, but I will not now enumerate
them, because I shall refer to them again as the occasion presents
itself.
The admirable sculptures and paintings buried in the ruins of Italy
remained hidden or unknown to the men of this time who were engrossed
in the rude productions of their own age, in which they used no
sculptures or paintings except such as were produced by the old
artists of Greece, who still survived, making images of clay or
stone, or painting grotesque figures and only colouring the first
lineaments. These artists were invited to Italy for they were the
best and indeed the only representatives of their profession. With
them they brought the mosaics, sculptures, and paintings which they
themselves produced and thus they taught their methods to the
Italians, after their own rough and clumsy style. The Italians
practised the art in this fashion up to a certain time, as I shall
relate.
As the men of the age were not accustomed to see any excellence or
greater perfection than the things thus produced, they greatly
admired them, and considered them to be the type of perfection, base
as they were. Yet some rising spirits aided by some quality in the
air of certain places, so far purged themselves of this crude style
that in 1250 Heaven took compassion on the fine minds that the Tuscan
soil was producing every day, and directed art into its former
channels. And although the preceding generations had before them the
remains of arches, colossi, statues, pillars or stone columns which
were left after the plunder, ruin and fire which Rome had passed
through, yet they could never make use of them or derive any profit
from them until the period named. Those who came after were able to
distinguish the good from the bad, and abandoning the old style they
began to copy the ancients with all ardour and industry. That the
distinction I have made between old and ancient may be better
understood I will explain that I call ancient the things produced
before Constantine at Corinth, Athens, Rome and other renowned
cities, until the days of Nero, Vaspasian, Trajan, Hadrian and
Antoninus; the old works are those which are due to the surviving
Greeks from the days of St Silvester, whose art consisted rather of
tinting than of painting. For the original artists of excellence had
perished in the wars, as I have said, and the surviving Greeks, of
the old and not the ancient manner, could only trace profiles on a
ground of colour. Countless mosaics done by these Greeks in every
part of Italy bear testimony to this, and every old church of Italy
possesses examples, notably the Duomo of Pisa, S. Marco at Venice
and yet other places. Thus they produced a constant stream of
figures in this style, with frightened eyes, outstretched hands and
on the tips of their toes, as in S. Miniato outside Florence between
the door of the sacristy and that of the convent, and in S. Spirito
in the same city, all the side of the cloister towards the church,
and in Arezzo in S. Giuliano and S. Bartolommeo and other churches,
and at Rome in old S. Peter's in the scenes about the windows, all of
which are more like monsters than the figures which they are supposed
to represent. They also produced countless sculptures, such as those
in bas-relief still over the door of S. Michele on the piazza Padella
at Florence, and in Ognissanti, and in many places, in tombs and
ornaments for the doors of churches, where there are some figures
acting as corbels to carry the roof, so rude and coarse, so grossly
made, and in such a rough style, that it is impossible to imagine
worse.
Up to the present, I have discoursed exclusively upon the origin of
sculpture and painting, perhaps more at length than was necessary at
this stage. I have done so, not so much because I have been carried
away by my love for the arts, as because I wish to be of service to
the artists of our own day, by showing them how a small beginning
leads to the highest elevation, and how from so noble a situation it
is possible to fall to utterest ruin, and consequently, how the
nature of these arts resembles nature in other things which concern
our human bodies; there is birth, growth, age, death, and I hope by
this means they will be enabled more easily to recognise the progress
of the renaissance of the arts, and the perfection to which they have
attained in our own time. And again, if ever it happens, which God
forbid, that the arts should once more fall to a like ruin and
disorder, through the negligence of man, the malignity of the age, or
the ordinance of Heaven, which does not appear to wish that the
things of this world should remain stationary, these labours of mine,
such as they are (if they are worthy of a happier fate), by means of
the things discussed before, and by those which remain to be said,
may maintain the arts in life, or, at any rate, encourage the better
spirits to provide them with assistance, so that, by my good will and
the labours of such men, they may have an abundance of those aids and
embellishments which, if I may speak the truth freely, they have
lacked until now.
But it is now time to come to the life of Giovanni Cimabue, who
originated the new method of design and painting, so that it is right
that his should be the first of the Lives. And here I may remark that
I shall follow the schools rather than a chronological order. And in
describing the appearance and the arts of the artists, I shall be
brief, because their portraits, which I have collected at great
expense, and with much labour and diligence, will show what manner of
men they were to look at much better than any description could ever
do. If some portraits are missing, that is not my fault, but because
they are not to be found anywhere. If it chance that some of the
portraits do not appear to be exactly like others which are extant,
it is necessary to reflect that a portrait of a man of eighteen or
twenty years can never be like one made fifteen or twenty years
later, and, in addition to this, portraits in black and white are
never so good as those which are coloured, besides which the
engravers, who do not design, always take something from the faces,
because they are never able to reproduce those small details which
constitute the excellence of a work, or to copy that perfection which
is rarely, if ever, to be found in wood engravings. To conclude, the
reader will be able to appreciate the amount of labour, expense, and
care which I have bestowed upon this matter when he sees what efforts
I have made in my researches.
VASARI'S LIVES OF THE PAINTERS.
Cimabue, Painter of Florence.