Men and words are ready made, and you, O Painter, if you do not know
how to make your figures move, are like an orator who knows not how
to use his words.
658.
As soon as the poet ceases to represent in words what exists in
nature, he in fact ceases to resemble the painter; for if the poet,
leaving such representation, proceeds to describe the flowery and
flattering speech of the figure, which he wishes to make the
speaker, he then is an orator and no longer a poet nor a painter.
And if he speaks of the heavens he becomes an astrologer, and
philosopher; and a theologian, if he discourses of nature or God.
But, if he restricts himself to the description of objects, he would
enter the lists against the painter, if with words he could satisfy
the eye as the painter does.
659.
Though you may be able to tell or write the exact description of
forms, the painter can so depict them that they will appear alive,
with the shadow and light which show the expression of a face; which
you cannot accomplish with the pen though it can be achieved by the
brush.
On the history of painting (660. 661).
660.
THAT PAINTING DECLINES AND DETERIORATES FROM AGE TO AGE, WHEN
PAINTERS HAVE NO OTHER STANDARD THAN PAINTING ALREADY DONE.
Hence the painter will produce pictures of small merit if he takes
for his standard the pictures of others. But if he will study from
natural objects he will bear good fruit; as was seen in the painters
after the Romans who always imitated each other and so their art
constantly declined from age to age. After these came Giotto the
Florentine who--not content with imitating the works of Cimabue his
master--being born in the mountains and in a solitude inhabited only
by goats and such beasts, and being guided by nature to his art,
began by drawing on the rocks the movements of the goats of which he
was keeper. And thus he began to draw all the animals which were to
be found in the country, and in such wise that after much study he
excelled not only all the masters of his time but all those of many
bygone ages. Afterwards this art declined again, because everyone
imitated the pictures that were already done; thus it went on from
century to century until Tomaso, of Florence, nicknamed Masaccio,
showed by his perfect works how those who take for their standard
any one but nature--the mistress of all masters--weary themselves in
vain. And, I would say about these mathematical studies that those
who only study the authorities and not the works of nature are
descendants but not sons of nature the mistress of all good authors.
Oh! how great is the folly of those who blame those who learn from
nature [Footnote 22: _lasciando stare li autori_. In this
observation we may detect an indirect evidence that Leonardo
regarded his knowledge of natural history as derived from his own
investigations, as well as his theories of perspective and optics.
Compare what he says in praise of experience (Vol II; _XIX_).],
setting aside those authorities who themselves were the disciples of
nature.
661.
That the first drawing was a simple line drawn round the shadow of a
man cast by the sun on a wall.
The painter's scope.
662.
The painter strives and competes with nature.
_X.
Studies and Sketches for Pictures and Decorations.
An artist's manuscript notes can hardly be expected to contain any
thing more than incidental references to those masterpieces of his
work of which the fame, sounded in the writings of his
contemporaries, has left a glorious echo to posterity. We need not
therefore be surprised to find that the texts here reproduced do not
afford us such comprehensive information as we could wish. On the
other hand, the sketches and studies prepared by Leonardo for the
two grandest compositions he ever executed: The Fresco of the Last
Supper in the Refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie at Milan, and
the Cartoon of the Battle of Anghiari, for the Palazzo della
Signoria at Florence--have been preserved; and, though far from
complete, are so much more numerous than the manuscript notes, that
we are justified in asserting that in value and interest they amply
compensate for the meagerness of the written suggestions.
The notes for the composition of the Last Supper, which are given
under nos._ 665 _and_ 666 _occur in a MS. at South Kensington, II2,
written in the years_ 1494-1495. _This MS. sketch was noted down not
more than three or four years before the painting was executed,
which justifies the inference that at the time when it was written
the painter had not made up his mind definitely even as to the
general scheme of the work; and from this we may also conclude that
the drawings of apostles' heads at Windsor, in red chalk, must be
ascribed to a later date. They are studies for the head of St.
Matthew, the fourth figure on Christ's left hand--see Pl. XL VII,
the sketch (in black chalk) for the head of St. Philip, the third
figure on the left hand--see Pl. XL VIII, for St. Peter's right
arm--see Pl. XLIX, and for the expressive head of Judas which has
unfortunately somewhat suffered by subsequent restoration of
outlines,--see Pl. L. According to a tradition, as unfounded as it
is improbable, Leonardo made use of the head of Padre Bandelli, the
prior of the convent, as the prototype of his Judas; this however
has already been contradicted by Amoretti "Memorie storiche" cap.
XIV. The study of the head of a criminal on Pl. LI has, it seems to
me, a better claim to be regarded as one of the preparatory sketches
for the head of Judas. The Windsor collection contains two old
copies of the head of St. Simon, the figure to the extreme left of
Christ, both of about equal merit (they are marked as Nos._ 21 _and_
36_)--the second was reproduced on Pl. VIII of the Grosvenor
Gallery Publication in_ 1878. _There is also at Windsor a drawing in
black chalk of folded hands (marked with the old No._ 212; _No. LXI
of the Grosvenor Gallery Publication) which I believe to be a copy
of the hands of St. John, by some unknown pupil. A reproduction of
the excellent drawings of heads of Apostles in the possession of H.
R. H. the Grand Duchess of Weimar would have been out of my province
in this work, and, with regard to them, I must confine myself to
pointing out that the difference in style does not allow of our
placing the Weimar drawings in the same category as those here
reproduced. The mode of grouping in the Weimar drawings is of itself
sufficient to indicate that they were not executed before the
picture was painted, but, on the contrary, afterwards, and it is, on
the face of it, incredible that so great a master should thus have
copied from his own work.
The drawing of Christ's head, in the Brera palace at Milan was
perhaps originally the work of Leonardo's hand; it has unfortunately
been entirely retouched and re-drawn, so that no decisive opinion
can be formed as to its genuineness.
The red chalk drawing reproduced on Pl. XLVI is in the Accademia at
Venice; it was probably made before the text, Nos._ 664 _and_ 665,
_was written.
The two pen and ink sketches on Pl. XLV seem to belong to an even
earlier date; the more finished drawing of the two, on the right
hand, represents Christ with only St. John and Judas and a third
disciple whose action is precisely that described in No._ 666,
_Pl._ 4. _It is hardly necessary to observe that the other sketches
on this page and the lines of text below the circle (containing the
solution of a geometrical problem) have no reference to the picture
of the Last Supper. With this figure of Christ may be compared a
similar pen and ink drawing reproduced on page_ 297 _below on the
left hand; the original is in the Louvre. On this page again the
rest of the sketches have no direct bearing on the composition of
the Last Supper, not even, as it seems to me, the group of four men
at the bottom to the right hand--who are listening to a fifth, in
their midst addressing them. Moreover the writing on this page (an
explanation of a disk shaped instrument) is certainly not in the
same style as we find constantly used by Leonardo after the year_
1489.
_It may be incidentally remarked that no sketches are known for the
portrait of "Mona Lisa", nor do the MS. notes ever allude to it,
though according to Vasari the master had it in hand for fully four
years.
Leonardo's cartoon for the picture of the battle of Anghiari has
shared the fate of the rival work, Michaelangelo's "Bathers summoned
to Battle". Both have been lost in some wholly inexplicable manner.
I cannot here enter into the remarkable history of this work; I can
only give an account of what has been preserved to us of Leonardo's
scheme and preparations for executing it. The extent of the material
in studies and drawings was till now quite unknown. Their
publication here may give some adequate idea of the grandeur of this
famous work. The text given as No._ 669 _contains a description of
the particulars of the battle, but for the reasons given in the note
to this text, I must abandon the idea of taking this passage as the
basis of my attempt to reconstruct the picture as the artist
conceived and executed it.
I may here remind the reader that Leonardo prepared the cartoon in
the Sala del Papa of Santa Maria Novella at Florence and worked
there from the end of October 1503 till February 1504, and then was
busied with the painting in the Sala del Consiglio in the Palazzo
della Signoria, till the work was interrupted at the end of May
1506. (See Milanesi's note to Vasari pp. 43--45 Vol. IV ed. 1880.)
Vasari, as is well known, describes only one scene or episode of the
cartoon--the Battle for the Standard in the foreground of the
composition, as it would seem; and this only was ever finished as a
mural decoration in the Sala del Consiglio. This portion of the
composition is familiar to all from the disfigured copy engraved by
Edelinck. Mariette had already very acutely observed that Edelinck
must surely have worked from a Flemish copy of the picture. There is
in the Louvre a drawing by Rubens (No. 565) which also represents
four horsemen fighting round a standard and which agrees with
Edelinck's engraving, but the engraving reverses the drawing. An
earlier Flemish drawing, such as may have served as the model for
both Rubens and Edelinck, is in the Uffizi collection (see
Philpots's Photograph, No. 732). It seems to be a work of the second
half of the XVIth century, a time when both the picture and the
cartoon had already been destroyed. It is apparently the production
of a not very skilled hand. Raphael Trichet du Fresne, 1651,
mentions that a small picture by Leonardo himself of the Battle of
the Standard was then extant in the Tuileries; by this he probably
means the painting on panel which is now in the possession of Madame
Timbal in Paris, and which has lately been engraved by Haussoullier
as a work by Leonardo. The picture, which is very carefully painted,
seems to me however to be the work of some unknown Florentine
painter, and probably executed within the first ten years of the
XVIth century. At the same time, it would seem to be a copy not from
Leonardo's cartoon, but from his picture in the Palazzo della
Signoria; at any rate this little picture, and the small Flemish
drawing in Florence are the oldest finished copies of this episode
in the great composition of the Battle of Anghiari.
In his Life of Raphael, Vasari tells us that Raphael copied certain
works of Leonardo's during his stay in Florence. Raphael's first
visit to Florence lasted from the middle of October 1504 till July
1505, and he revisited it in the summer of 1506. The hasty sketch,
now in the possession of the University of Oxford and reproduced on
page 337 also represents the Battle of the Standard and seems to
have been made during his first stay, and therefore not from the
fresco but from the cartoon; for, on the same sheet we also find,
besides an old man's head drawn in Leonardo's style, some studies
for the figure of St. John the Martyr which Raphael used in 1505 in
his great fresco in the Church of San Severo at Perugia.
Of Leonardo's studies for the Battle of Anghiari I must in the first
place point to five, on three of which--Pl. LII 2, Pl. LIII, Pl.
LVI--we find studies for the episode of the Standard. The standard
bearer, who, in the above named copies is seen stooping, holding on
to the staff across his shoulder, is immediately recognisable as the
left-hand figure in Raphael's sketch, and we find it in a similar
attitude in Leonardo's pen and ink drawing in the British
Museum--Pl. LII, 2--the lower figure to the right. It is not
difficult to identify the same figure in two more complicated groups
in the pen and ink drawings, now in the Accademia at Venice--Pl.
LIII, and Pl. LIV--where we also find some studies of foot soldiers
fighting. On the sheet in the British Museum--Pl. LII, 2--we find,
among others, one group of three horses galloping forwards: one
horseman is thrown and protects himself with his buckler against the
lance thrusts of two others on horseback, who try to pierce him as
they ride past. The same action is repeated, with some variation, in
two sketches in pen and ink on a third sheet, in the Accademia at
Venice, Pl. LV; a coincidence which suggests the probability of such
an incident having actually been represented on the cartoon. We are
not, it is true, in a position to declare with any certainty which
of these three dissimilar sketches may have been the nearest to the
group finally adopted in executing the cartoon.
With regard, however, to one of the groups of horsemen it is
possible to determine with perfect certainty not only which
arrangement was preferred, but the position it occupied in the
composition. The group of horsemen on Pl. LVII is a drawing in black
chalk at Windsor, which is there attributed to Leonardo, but which
appears to me to be the work of Cesare da Sesto, and the
Commendatore Giov. Morelli supports me in this view. It can hardly
be doubted that da Sesto, as a pupil of Leonardo's, made this
drawing from his master's cartoon, if we compare it with the copy
made by Raphael--here reproduced, for just above the fighting
horseman in Raphael's copy it is possible to detect a horse which is
seen from behind, going at a slower pace, with his tail flying out
to the right and the same horse may be seen in the very same
attitude carrying a dimly sketched rider, in the foreground of
Cesare da Sesto's drawing._
_If a very much rubbed drawing in black chalk at Windsor--Pl.
LVI--is, as it appears to be, the reversed impression of an original
drawing, it is not difficult to supplement from it the portions
drawn by Cesare da Sesto. Nay, it may prove possible to reconstruct
the whole of the lost cartoon from the mass of materials we now have
at hand which we may regard as the nucleus of the composition. A
large pen and ink drawing by Raphael in the Dresden collection,
representing three horsemen fighting, and another, by Cesare da
Sesto, in the Uffizi, of light horsemen fighting are a further
contribution which will help us to reconstruct it._
_The sketch reproduced on Pl. LV gives a suggestive example of the
way in which foot-soldiers may have been introduced into the cartoon
as fighting among the groups of horsemen; and I may here take the
opportunity of mentioning that, for reasons which it would be out of
place to enlarge upon here, I believe the two genuine drawings by
Raphael's hand in his "Venetian sketch-book" as it is called--one of
a standard bearer marching towards the left, and one of two
foot-soldiers armed with spears and fighting with a horseman--to be
undoubtedly copies from the cartoon of the Battle of Anghiari._
_Leonardo's two drawings, preserved in the museum at Buda-Pesth and
reproduced on pages 338 and 339 are preliminary studies for the
heads of fighting warriors. The two heads drawn in black chalk (pg.
338) and the one seen in profile, turned to the left, drawn in red
chalk (pg. 339), correspond exactly with those of two horsemen in
the scene of the fight round the standard as we see them in Madame
Timbal's picture and in the other finished copies. An old copy of
the last named drawing by a pupil of Leonardo is in MS. C. A. 187b;
561b (See Saggio, Tav. XXII). Leonardo used to make such finished
studies of heads as those, drawn on detached sheets, before
beginning his pictures from his drawings--compare the preparatory
studies for the fresco of the Last Supper, given on Pl. XLVII and
Pl. L. Other drawings of heads, all characterised by the expression
of vehement excitement that is appropriate to men fighting, are to
be seen at Windsor (No. 44) and at the Accademia at Venice (IV, 13);
at the back of one of the drawings at Buda-Pesth there is the bust
of a warrior carrying a spear on his left shoulder, holding up the
left arm (See Csatakepek a XVI--lk Szazadbol osszeallitotta Pvlszky
Karoly). These drawings may have been made for other portions of the
cartoon, of which no copies exist, and thus we are unable to
identify these preparatory drawings. Finally I may add that a sketch
of fighting horse and foot soldiers, formerly in the possession of
M. Thiers and published by Charles Blanc in his "Vies des Peintres"
can hardly be accepted as genuine. It is not to be found, as I am
informed, among the late President's property, and no one appears to
know where it now is._
_An attempted reconstruction of the Cartoon, which is not only
unsuccessful but perfectly unfounded, is to be seen in the
lithograph by Bergeret, published in Charles Blanc's "Vies des
peintres" and reprinted in "The great Artists. L. da Vinci", p. 80.
This misleading pasticcio may now be rejected without hesitation._
_There are yet a few original drawings by Leonardo which might be
mentioned here as possibly belonging to the cartoon of the Battle;
such as the pen and ink sketches on Pl. XXI and on Pl. XXXVIII, No.
3, but we should risk too wide a departure from the domain of
ascertained fact._
_With regard to the colours and other materials used by Leonardo the
reader may be referred to the quotations from the accounts for the
picture in question given by Milanesi in his edition of Vasari (Vol.
IV, p. 44, note) where we find entries of a similar character to
those in Leonardo's note books for the year 1505; S. K. M. 12 (see
No. 636)._
_That Leonardo was employed in designing decorations and other
preparations for high festivals, particularly for the court of
Milan, we learn not only from the writings of his contemporaries but
from his own incidental allusions; for instance in MS. C. l5b (1),
l. 9. In the arrangement of the texts referring to this I have
placed those first, in which historical personages are named--Nos.
670-674. Among the descriptions of Allegorical subjects two texts
lately found at Oxford have been included, Nos. 676 and 677. They
are particularly interesting because they are accompanied by large
sketches which render the meaning of the texts perfectly clear. It
is very intelligible that in other cases, where there are no
illustrative sketches, the notes must necessarily remain obscure or
admit of various interpretations. The literature of the time affords
ample evidence of the use of such allegorical representations,
particularly during the Carnival and in Leonardo's notes we find the
Carnival expressly mentioned--Nos. 685 and 704. Vasari in his Life
of Pontormo, particularly describes that artist's various
undertakings for Carnival festivities. These very graphic
descriptions appear to me to throw great light in more ways than one
on the meaning of Leonardo's various notes as to allegorical
representations and also on mottoes and emblems--Nos. 681-702. In
passing judgment on the allegorical sketches and emblems it must not
be overlooked that even as pictures they were always accompanied by
explanations in words. Several finished drawings of allegorical
compositions or figures have been preserved, but as they have no
corresponding explanation in the MSS. they had no claim to be
reproduced here. The female figure on Pl. XXVI may perhaps be
regarded as a study for such an allegorical painting, of which the
purport would have been explained by an inscription._
On Madonna pictures.
663.
[In the autumn of] 1478 I began the two Madonna [pictures].
[Footnote: Photographs of this page have been published by BRAUN,
No. 439, and PHILPOT, No. 718.
1. _Incominciai_. We have no other information as to the two
pictures of the Madonna here spoken of. As Leonardo here tells us
that he had begun two Madonnas at the same time, the word
'_incominciai_' may be understood to mean that he had begun at the
same time preparatory studies for two pictures to be painted later.
If this is so, the non-existence of the pictures may be explained by
supposing that they were only planned and never executed. I may here
mention a few studies for pictures of the Madonna which probably
belong to this early time; particularly a drawing in silver-point on
bluish tinted paper at Windsor--see Pl. XL, No. 3--, a drawing of
which the details have almost disappeared in the original but have
been rendered quite distinct in the reproduction; secondly a slight
pen and ink sketch in, the Codex VALLARDI, in the Louvre, fol. 64,
No. 2316; again a silver point drawing of a Virgin and child drawn
over again with the pen in the His de la Salle collection also in
the Louvre, No. 101. (See Vicomte BOTH DE TAUZIA, _Notice des
dessins de la collection His de la Salle, exposes au Louvre_. Paris
1881, pp. 80, 81.) This drawing is, it is true, traditionally
ascribed to Raphael, but the author of the catalogue very justly
points out its great resemblance with the sketches for Madonnas in
the British Museum which are indisputably Leonardo's. Some of these
have been published by Mr. HENRY WALLIS in the Art Journal, New Ser.
No. 14, Feb. 1882. If the non-existence of the two pictures here
alluded to justifies my hypothesis that only studies for such
pictures are meant by the text, it may also be supposed that the
drawings were made for some comrade in VERROCCHIO'S atelier. (See
VASARI, Sansoni's ed. Florence 1880. Vol. IV, p. 564): "_E perche a
Lerenzo piaceva fuor di modo la maniera di Lionardo, la seppe cosi
bene imitare, che niuno fu che nella pulitezza e nel finir l'opere
con diligenza l'imitasse più di lui_." Leonardo's notes give me no
opportunity of discussing the pictures executed by him in Florence,
before he moved to Milan. So the studies for the unfinished picture
of the Adoration of the Magi--in the Uffizi, Florence--cannot be
described here, nor would any discussion about the picture in the
Louvre "_La Vierge aux Rochers_" be appropriate in the absence of
all allusion to it in the MSS. Therefore, when I presently add a few
remarks on this painting in explanation of the Master's drawings for
it, it will be not merely with a view to facilitate critical
researches about the picture now in the National Gallery, London,
which by some critics has been pronounced to be a replica of the
Louvre picture, but also because I take this opportunity of
publishing several finished studies of the Master's which, even if
they were not made in Florence but later in Milan, must have been
prior to the painting of the Last Supper. The original picture in
Paris is at present so disfigured by dust and varnish that the
current reproductions in photography actually give evidence more of
the injuries to which the picture has been exposed than of the
original work itself. The wood-cut given on p. 344, is only intended
to give a general notion of the composition. It must be understood
that the outline and expression of the heads, which in the picture
is obscured but not destroyed, is here altogether missed. The
facsimiles which follow are from drawings which appear to me to be
studies for "_La Vierge aux Rochers_."
1. A drawing in silver point on brown toned paper of a woman's head
looking to the left. In the Royal Library at Turin, apparently a
study from nature for the Angel's head (Pl. XLII).
2. A study of drapery for the left leg of the same figure, done with
the brush, Indian ink on greenish paper, the lights heightened with
white.
The original is at Windsor, No. 223. The reproduction Pl. XLIII is
defective in the shadow on the upper part of the thigh, which is not
so deep as in the original; it should also be observed that the
folds of the drapery near the hips are somewhat altered in the
finished work in the Louvre, while the London copy shows a greater
resemblance to this study in that particular.
3. A study in red chalk for the bust of the Infant Christ--No. 3 in
the Windsor collection (Pl. XLIV). The well-known silver-point
drawing on pale green paper, in the Louvre, of a boy's head (No. 363
in REISET, _Notice des dessins, Ecoles d'Italie_) seems to me to be
a slightly altered copy, either from the original picture or from
this red chalk study.
4. A silver-point study on greenish paper, for the head of John the
Baptist, reproduced on p. 342. This was formerly in the Codex
Vallardi and is now exhibited among the drawings in the Louvre. The
lights are, in the original, heightened with white; the outlines,
particularly round the head and ear, are visibly restored.
There is a study of an outstretched hand--No. 288 in the Windsor
collection--which was published in the Grosvenor Gallery
Publication, 1878, simply under the title of: "No. 72 Study of a
hand, pointing" which, on the other hand, I regard as a copy by a
pupil. The action occurs in the kneeling angel of the Paris picture
and not in the London copy.
These four genuine studies form, I believe, a valuable substitute in
the absence of any MS. notes referring to the celebrated Paris
picture.]
Bernardo di Bandino's Portrait.
664.
A tan-coloured small cap, A doublet of black serge, A black jerkin
lined A blue coat lined, with fur of foxes' breasts, and the collar
of the jerkin covered with black and white stippled velvet Bernardo
di Bandino Baroncelli; black hose.
[Footnote: These eleven lines of text are by the side of the pen and
ink drawing of a man hanged--Pl. LXII, No. 1. This drawing was
exhibited in 1879 at the _Ecole des Beaux-Arts_ in Paris and the
compilers of the catalogue amused themselves by giving the victim's
name as follows: "_Un pendu, vetu d'une longue robe, les mains liées
sur le dos ... Bernardo di Bendino Barontigni, marchand de
pantalons_" (see _Catalogue descriptif des Dessins de Mailres
anciens exposes a l'Ecole des Beaux Arts_, Paris 1879; No. 83, pp.
9-10). Now, the criminal represented here, is none other than
Bernardino di Bandino Baroncelli the murderer of Giuliano de'Medici,
whose name as a coadjutor in the conspiracy of the Pazzi has gained
a melancholy notoriety by the tragedy of the 26th April 1478.
Bernardo was descended from an ancient family and the son of the man
who, under King Ferrante, was President of the High Court of Justice
in Naples. His ruined fortunes, it would seem, induced him to join
the Pazzi; he and Francesco Pazzi were entrusted with the task of
murdering Giuliano de'Medici on the fixed day. Their victim not
appearing in the cathedral at the hour when they expected him, the
two conspirators ran to the palace of the Medici and induced him to
accompany them. Giuliano then took his place in the chancel of the
Cathedral, and as the officiating priest raised the Host--the sign
agreed upon--Bernardo stabbed the unsuspecting Giuliano in the
breast with a short sword; Giuliano stepped backwards and fell dead.
The attempt on Lorenzo's life however, by the other conspirators at
the same moment, failed of success. Bernardo no sooner saw that
Lorenzo tried to make his escape towards the sacristy, than he
rushed upon him, and struck down Francesco Nori who endeavoured to
protect Lorenzo. How Lorenzo then took refuge behind the brazen
doors of the sacristy, and how, as soon as Giuliano's death was made
known, the further plans of the conspirators were defeated, while a
terrible vengeance overtook all the perpetrators and accomplices,
this is no place to tell. Bernardo Bandini alone seemed to be
favoured by fortune; he hid first in the tower of the Cathedral, and
then escaped undiscovered from Florence. Poliziano, who was with
Lorenzo in the Cathedral, says in his 'Conjurationis Pactianae
Commentarium': "_Bandinus fugitans in Tiphernatem incidit, a quo in
aciem receptus Senas pervenit_." And Gino Capponi in summing up the
reports of the numerous contemporary narrators of the event, says:
"_Bernardo Bandini ricoverato in Costantinopoli, fu per ordine del
Sultano preso e consegnato a un Antonio di Bernardino dei Medici,
che Lorenzo aveva mandato apposta in Turchia: così era grande la
potenza di quest' uomo e grande la voglia di farne mostra e che non
restasse in vita chi aveagli ucciso il fratello, fu egli applicato
appena giunto_" (_Storia della Republica di Firenze II_, 377, 378).
Details about the dates may be found in the _Chronichetta di
Belfredello Strinati Alfieri_: "_Bernardo di Bandino Bandini
sopradetto ne venne preso da Gostantinopoti a dì 14. Dicembre 1479 e
disaminato, che fu al Bargello, fu impiccato alle finestre di detto
Bargello allato alla Doana a dì 29. Dicembre MCCCCLXXIX che pochi dì
stette_." It may however be mentioned with reference to the mode of
writing the name of the assassin that, though most of his
contemporaries wrote Bernardo Bandini, in the _Breve Chronicon
Caroli Petri de Joanninis_ he is called Bernardo di Bandini
Baroncelli; and, in the _Sententiae Domini Matthaei de Toscana_,
Bernardus Joannis Bandini de Baroncellis, as is written on
Leonardo's drawing of him when hanged. Now VASARI, in the life of
_Andrea del Castagno_ (Vol. II, 680; ed. Milanesi 1878), tells us
that in 1478 this painter was commissioned by order of the Signoria
to represent the members of the Pazzi conspiracy as traitors, on the
facade of the Palazzo del Podestà--the Bargello. This statement is
obviously founded on a mistake, for Andrea del Castagno was already
dead in 1457. He had however been commissioned to paint Rinaldo
degli Albizzi, when declared a rebel and exiled in 1434, and his
adherents, as hanging head downwards; and in consequence he had
acquired the nickname of Andrea degl' Impiccati. On the 21st July
1478 the Council of Eight came to the following resolution: "_item
servatis etc. deliberaverunt et santiaverunt Sandro Botticelli pro
ejus labore in pingendo proditores flor. quadraginta largos_" (see
G. MILANESI, _Arch. star. VI_ (1862) p. 5 note.)
As has been told, Giuliano de' Medici was murdered on the 26th April
1478, and we see by this that only three months later Botticelli was
paid for his painting of the "_proditores_". We can however hardly
suppose that all the members of the conspiracy were depicted by him
in fresco on the facade of the palace, since no fewer than eighty
had been condemned to death. We have no means of knowing whether,
besides Botticelli, any other painters, perhaps Leonardo, was
commissioned, when the criminals had been hanged in person out of
the windows of the Palazzo del Podestà to represent them there
afterwards in effigy in memory of their disgrace. Nor do we know
whether the assassin who had escaped may at first not have been
provisionally represented as hanged in effigy. Now, when we try to
connect the historical facts with this drawing by Leonardo
reproduced on Pl. LXII, No. I, and the full description of the
conspirator's dress and its colour on the same sheet, there seems to
be no reasonable doubt that Bernardo Bandini is here represented as
he was actually hanged on December 29th, 1479, after his capture at
Constantinople. The dress is certainly not that in which he
committed the murder. A long furred coat might very well be worn at
Constantinople or at Florence in December, but hardly in April. The
doubt remains whether Leonardo described Bernardo's dress so fully
because it struck him as remarkable, or whether we may not rather
suppose that this sketch was actually made from nature with the
intention of using it as a study for a wall painting to be executed.
It cannot be denied that the drawing has all the appearance of
having been made for this purpose. Be this as it may, the sketch
under discussion proves, at any rate, that Leonardo was in Florence
in December 1479, and the note that accompanies it is valuable as
adding one more characteristic specimen to the very small number of
his MSS. that can be proved to have been written between 1470 and
1480.]
Notes on the Last Supper (665-668).
665.
One who was drinking and has left the glass in its position and
turned his head towards the speaker.
Another, twisting the fingers of his hands together turns with stern
brows to his companion [6]. Another with his hands spread open shows
the palms, and shrugs his shoulders up his ears making a mouth of
astonishment [8].
[9] Another speaks into his neighbour's ear and he, as he listens to
him, turns towards him to lend an ear [10], while he holds a knife
in one hand, and in the other the loaf half cut through by the
knife. [13] Another who has turned, holding a knife in his hand,
upsets with his hand a glass on the table [14].
[Footnote 665, 666: In the original MS. there is no sketch to
accompany these passages, and if we compare them with those drawings
made by Leonardo in preparation for the composition of the
picture--Pl. XLV, XLVI--, (compare also Pl. LII, 1 and the drawings
on p. 297) it is impossible to recognise in them a faithful
interpretation of the whole of this text; but, if we compare these
passages with the finished picture (see p. 334) we shall see that in
many places they coincide. For instance, compare No. 665, 1. 6--8,
with the fourth figure on the right hand of Christ. The various
actions described in lines 9--10, 13--14 are to be seen in the group
of Peter, John and Judas; in the finished picture however it is not
a glass but a salt cellar that Judas is upsetting.]
666.
Another lays his hand on the table and is looking. Another blows his
mouthful. [3] Another leans forward to see the speaker shading his
eyes with his hand. [5] Another draws back behind the one who leans
forward, and sees the speaker between the wall and the man who is
leaning [Footnote: 6. _chinato_. I have to express my regret for
having misread this word, written _cinato_ in the original, and
having altered it to _"ciclo"_ when I first published this text, in
'The Academy' for Nov. 8, 1879 immediately after I had discovered
it, and subsequently in the small biography of Leonardo da Vinci
(Great Artists) p. 29.].
[Footnote: In No. 666. Line I must refer to the furthest figure on
the left; 3, 5 and 6 describe actions which are given to the group
of disciples on the left hand of Christ.]
667.