one father, that is, design, at one and the same birth, and have no
precedence one over the other, save insomuch as the worth and the
strength of those who maintain them make one craftsman surpass another,
and not by reason of any difference or degree of nobility that is in
truth to be found between them. And although by reason of the diversity
of their essence they have many different advantages, these are neither
so great nor of such a kind that they do not come exactly into balance
together and that we do not perceive the infatuation or the obstinacy,
rather than the judgment, of those who wish one to surpass the other.
Wherefore it may be said with reason that one and the same soul rules
the bodies of both, and by reason of this I conclude that those do evil
who strive to disunite and to separate the one from the other. Heaven,
wishing to undeceive us in this matter and to show us the kinship and
union of these two most noble arts, has raised up in our midst at
various times many sculptors who have painted and many painters who have
worked in sculpture, as will be seen in the Life of Antonio del
Pollaiuolo, of Leonardo da Vinci, and of many others long since passed
away. But in our own age the Divine Goodness has created for us
Michelagnolo Buonarroti, in whom both these arts shine forth so perfect
and appear so similar and so closely united, that the painters marvel at
his pictures and the sculptors feel for the sculptures wrought by him
supreme admiration and reverence. On him, to the end that he might not
perchance need to seek from some other master some convenient
resting-place for the figures that he wrought, nature has bestowed so
generously the science of architecture, that without having need of
others he has strength and power within himself to give to this or the
other image made by himself an honourable and suitable resting-place, in
a manner that he rightly deserves to be called the king of sculptors,
the prince of painters, and the most excellent of architects, nay
rather, of architecture the true master. And indeed we can affirm with
certainty that those do in no way err who call him divine, seeing that
he has within his own self embraced the three arts most worthy of praise
and most ingenious that are to be found among mortal men, and that with
these, after the manner of a God, he can give us infinite delight. And
let this suffice for the dispute raised between the factions, and for
our own opinion.
Now, returning to my first intention, I say that, wishing in so far as
it lies within the reach of my powers to drag from the ravening maw of
time, the names of the sculptors, painters, and architects, who, from
Cimabue to the present day, have been of some notable excellence in
Italy, and desiring that this my labour may be no less useful than it
has been pleasant to me in the undertaking, it appears to me necessary,
before we come to the history, to make as briefly as may be an
introduction to these three arts, wherein those were valiant of whom I
am to write the Lives, to the end that every gracious spirit may first
learn the most notable things in their professions, and afterwards may
be able with greater pleasure and benefit to see clearly in what they
were different among themselves, and how great adornment and convenience
they give to their countries and to all who wish to avail themselves of
their industry and knowledge.
I will begin, then, with architecture, as the most universal and the
most necessary and useful to men, and as that for the service and
adornment of which the two others exist; and I will expound briefly the
varieties of stone, the manners or methods of construction, with their
proportions, and how one may recognize buildings that are good and
well-conceived. Afterwards, discoursing of sculpture, I will tell how
statues are wrought, the form and the proportion that are looked for in
them, and of what kind are good sculptures, with all the most secret and
most necessary precepts. Finally, treating of painting, I will speak of
draughtsmanship, of the methods of colouring, of the perfect execution
of any work, of the quality of the pictures themselves, and of
whatsoever thing appertains to painting; of every kind of mosaic, of
niello, of enamelling, of damascening, and then, lastly, of the printing
of pictures. And in this way I am convinced that these my labours will
delight those who are not engaged in these pursuits, and will both
delight and help those who have made them a profession. For not to
mention that in the Introduction they will review the methods of
working, and that in the Lives of the craftsmen themselves they will
learn where their works are, and how to recognize easily their
perfection or imperfection and to discriminate between one manner and
another, they will also be able to perceive how much praise and honour
that man deserves who adds upright ways and goodness of life to the
excellencies of arts so noble. Kindled by the praise that those so
constituted have obtained, they too will aspire to true glory. Nor will
little fruit be gathered from the history, true guide and mistress of
our actions, in reading of the infinite variety of innumerable accidents
that befell the craftsmen, sometimes by their own fault and very often
by chance.
It remains for me to make excuse for having on occasion used some words
of indifferent Tuscan, whereof I do not wish to speak, having ever taken
thought to use rather the words and names particular and proper to our
arts than the delicate or choice words of precious writers. Let me be
allowed, then, to use in their proper speech the words proper to our
craftsmen, and let all content themselves with my good will, which has
bestirred itself to produce this result not in order to teach to others
what I do not know myself, but through a desire to preserve this memory
at least of the most celebrated craftsmen, seeing that in so many
decades I have not yet been able to see one who has made much record of
them. For I have wished with these my rough labours, adumbrating their
noble deeds, to repay to them in some measure the debt that I owe to
their works, which have been to me as masters for the learning of
whatsoever I know, rather than, living in sloth, to be a malignant
critic of the works of others, blaming and decrying them as men are
often wont to do. But it is now time to come to our business.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 2: The process of sgraffito work is described in Professor
Baldwin Brown's notes to "Vasari on Technique" as follows: "A wall is
covered with a layer of tinted plaster, and on this is superimposed a
thin coating of white plaster. This outer coating is scratched through
(with an iron tool), and the colour behind is revealed. Then all the
surface outside the design is cut away, and a cameo-like effect is given
to the design."]
[Footnote 3: The process of niello is as follows: A design is engraved
on silver or bronze, and the lines of the design are filled with a
composition of silver and lead. On the application of fire to the whole,
this composition turns black, leaving the design strongly outlined.]
PREFACE TO THE LIVES
I have no manner of doubt that it is with almost all writers a common
and deeply-fixed opinion that sculpture and painting together were first
discovered, by the light of nature, by the people of Egypt, and that
there are certain others who attribute to the Chaldaeans the first rough
sketches in marble and the first reliefs in statuary, even as they also
give to the Greeks the invention of the brush and of colouring. But I
will surely say that of both one and the other of these arts the design,
which is their foundation, nay rather, the very soul that conceives and
nourishes within itself all the parts of man's intellect, was already
most perfect before the creation of all other things, when the Almighty
God, having made the great body of the world and having adorned the
heavens with their exceeding bright lights, descended lower with His
intellect into the clearness of the air and the solidity of the earth,
and, shaping man, discovered, together with the lovely creation of all
things, the first form of sculpture; from which man afterwards, step by
step (and this may not be denied), as from a true pattern, there were
taken statues, sculptures, and the science of pose and of outline; and
for the first pictures (whatsoever they were), softness, harmony, and
the concord in discord that comes from light and shade. Thus, then, the
first model whence there issued the first image of man was a lump of
clay, and not without reason, seeing that the Divine Architect of time
and of nature, being Himself most perfect, wished to show in the
imperfection of the material the way to add and to take away; in the
same manner wherein the good sculptors and painters are wont to work,
who, adding and taking away in their models, bring their imperfect
sketches to that final perfection which they desire. He gave to man that
most vivid colour of flesh, whence afterwards there were drawn for
painting, from the mines of the earth, the colours themselves for the
counterfeiting of all those things that are required for pictures. It is
true, indeed, that it cannot be affirmed for certain what was made by
the men before the Flood in these arts in imitation of so beautiful a
work, although it is reasonable to believe that they too carved and
painted in every manner; seeing that Belus, son of the proud Nimrod,
about 200 years after the Flood, caused to be made that statue wherefrom
there was afterwards born idolatry, and his son's wife, the very famous
Semiramis, Queen of Babylon, in the building of that city, placed among
its adornments not only diverse varied kinds of animals, portrayed and
coloured from nature, but also the image of herself and of Ninus, her
husband, and, moreover, statues in bronze of her husband's father, of
her husband's mother, and of the mother of the latter, as Diodorus
relates, calling them by the Greek names (that did not yet exist), Jove,
Juno, and Ops. From these statues, perchance, the Chaldaeans learnt to
make the images of their gods, seeing that 150 years later Rachel, in
flying from Mesopotamia together with Jacob her husband, stole the idols
of Laban her father, as is clearly related in Genesis. Nor, indeed, were
the Chaldaeans alone in making sculptures and pictures, but the Egyptians
made them also, exercising themselves in these arts with that so great
zeal which is shown in the marvellous tomb of the most ancient King
Osimandyas, copiously described by Diodorus, and proved by the stern
commandment made by Moses in the Exodus from Egypt, namely, that under
pain of death there should be made to God no image whatsoever. He, on
descending from the mountain, having found the golden calf wrought and
adored solemnly by his people, and being greatly perturbed to see Divine
honours paid to the image of a beast, not only broke it and reduced it
to powder, but for punishment of so great a sin caused many thousands of
the wicked sons of Israel to be slain by the Levites. But because not
the making of statues but their adoration was a deadly sin, we read in
Exodus that the art of design and of statuary, not only in marble but in
every kind of metal, was bestowed by the mouth of God on Bezaleel, of
the tribe of Judah, and on Aholiab, of the tribe of Dan, who were those
that made the two cherubim of gold, the candlesticks, the veil, the
borders of the priestly vestments, and so many other most beautiful
castings for the Tabernacle, for no other reason than to bring the
people to contemplate and to adore them.
From the things seen before the Flood, then, the pride of men found the
way to make the statues of those for whom they wished that they should
remain famous and immortal in the world. And the Greeks, who think
differently about this origin, say that the Ethiopians invented the
first statues, as Diodorus tells; that the Egyptians took them from the
Ethiopians, and, from them, the Greeks; for by Homer's time sculpture
and painting are seen to have been perfected, as it is proved, in
discoursing of the shield of Achilles, by that divine poet, who shows it
to us carved and painted, rather than described, with every form of art.
Lactantius Firmianus, by way of fable, attributes it to Prometheus, who,
in the manner of Almighty God, shaped man's image out of mud; and from
him, he declares, the art of statuary came. But according to what Pliny
writes, this came to Egypt from Gyges the Lydian, who, being by the fire
and gazing at his own shadow, suddenly, with some charcoal in his hand,
drew his own outline on the wall. And from that age, for a time,
outlines only were wont to be used, with no body of colour, as the same
Pliny confirms; which method was rediscovered with more labour by
Philocles the Egyptian, and likewise by Cleanthes and Ardices of Corinth
and by Telephanes of Sicyon.
Cleophantes of Corinth was the first among the Greeks who used colours,
and Apollodorus the first who discovered the brush. There followed
Polygnotus of Thasos, Zeuxis, and Timagoras of Chalcis, with Pythias and
Aglaophon, all most celebrated; and after these the most famous Apelles,
so much esteemed and honoured by Alexander the Great for his talent, and
the most ingenious investigator of slander and false favour, as Lucian
shows us; even as almost all the excellent painters and sculptors were
endowed by Heaven, in nearly every case, not only with the adornment of
poetry, as may be read of Pacuvius, but with philosophy besides, as may
be seen in Metrodorus, who, being as well versed in philosophy as in
painting, was sent by the Athenians to Paulus Emilius to adorn his
triumph, and remained with him to read philosophy to his sons.
The art of sculpture, then, was greatly exercised in Greece, and there
appeared many excellent craftsmen, and, among others, Pheidias, an
Athenian, with Praxiteles and Polycletus, all very great masters, while
Lysippus and Pyrgoteles were excellent in sunk reliefs, and Pygmalion in
reliefs in ivory, of whom there is a fable that by his prayers he
obtained breath and spirit for the figure of a virgin that he made.
Painting, likewise, was honoured and rewarded by the ancient Greeks and
Romans, seeing that to those who made it appear marvellous they showed
favour by bestowing on them citizenship and the highest dignities. So
greatly did this art flourish in Rome that Fabius gave renown to his
house by writing his name under the things so beautifully painted by him
in the temple of Salus, and calling himself Fabius Pictor. It was
forbidden by public decree that slaves should exercise this art
throughout the cities, and so much honour did the nations pay without
ceasing to the art and to the craftsmen that the rarest works were sent
among the triumphal spoils, as marvellous things, to Rome, and the
finest craftsmen were freed from slavery and recompensed with honours
and rewards by the commonwealths.
The Romans themselves bore so great reverence for these arts that
besides the respect that Marcellus, in sacking the city of Syracuse,
commanded to be paid to a craftsman famous in them, in planning the
assault of the aforesaid city they took care not to set fire to that
quarter wherein there was a most beautiful painted panel, which was
afterwards carried to Rome in the triumph, with much pomp. Thither,
having, so to speak, despoiled the world, in course of time they
assembled the craftsmen themselves as well as their finest works,
wherewith afterwards Rome became so beautiful, for the reason that she
gained so great adornment from the statues from abroad more than from
her own native ones; it being known that in Rhodes, the city of an
island in no way large, there were more than 30,000 statues counted,
either in bronze or in marble, nor did the Athenians have less, while
those at Olympia and at Delphi were many more and those in Corinth
numberless, and all were most beautiful and of the greatest value. Is
it not known that Nicomedes, King of Lycia, in his eagerness for a Venus
that was by the hand of Praxiteles, spent on it almost all the wealth of
his people? Did not Attalus the same, who, in order to possess the
picture of Bacchus painted by Aristides, did not scruple to spend on it
more than 6,000 sesterces? Which picture was placed by Lucius Mummius in
the temple of Ceres with the greatest pomp, in order to adorn Rome.
But for all that the nobility of these arts was so highly valued, it is
none the less not yet known for certain who gave them their first
beginning. For, as has been already said above, it appears most ancient
among the Chaldaeans, some give it to the Ethiopians, and the Greeks
attribute it to themselves; and it may be thought, not without reason,
that it is perchance even more ancient among the Etruscans, as our Leon
Batista Alberti testifies, whereof we have clear enough proof in the
marvellous tomb of Porsena at Chiusi, where, no long time since, there
were discovered underground, between the walls of the Labyrinth, some
terracotta tiles with figures on them in half-relief, so excellent and
in so beautiful a manner that it can be easily recognized that the art
was not begun precisely at that time, nay rather, by reason of the
perfection of these works, that it was much nearer its height than its
beginning. To this, moreover, witness is likewise borne by our seeing
every day many pieces of those red and black vases of Arezzo, made, as
may be judged from the manner, about those times, with the most delicate
carvings and small figures and scenes in low-relief, and many small
round masks wrought with great subtlety by masters of that age, men most
experienced, as is shown by the effect, and most excellent in that art.
It may be seen, moreover, by reason of the statues found at Viterbo at
the beginning of the pontificate of Alexander VI, that sculpture was in
great esteem and in no small perfection among the Etruscans; and
although it is not known precisely at what time they were made, it may
be reasonably conjectured, both from the manner of the figures and from
the style of the tombs and of the buildings, no less than from the
inscriptions in those Etruscan letters, that they are most ancient and
were made at a time when the affairs of this country were in a good and
prosperous state. But what clearer proof of this can be sought? seeing
that in our own day--that is, in the year 1554--there has been found a
bronze figure of the Chimaera of Bellerophon, in making the ditches,
fortifications, and walls of Arezzo, from which figure it is recognized
that the perfection of that art existed in ancient times among the
Etruscans, as may be seen from the Etruscan manner and still more from
the letters carved on a paw, about which--since they are but few and
there is no one now who understands the Etruscan tongue--it is
conjectured that they may represent the name of the master as well as
that of the figure itself, and perchance also the date, according to the
use of those times. This figure, by reason of its beauty and antiquity,
has been placed in our day by the Lord Duke Cosimo in the hall of the
new rooms in his Palace, wherein there have been painted by me the acts
of Pope Leo X. And besides this there were found in the same place many
small figures in bronze after the same manner, which are in the hands of
the said Lord Duke.
But since the dates of the works of the Greeks, the Ethiopians, and the
Chaldaeans are as doubtful as our own, and perhaps more, and by reason of
the greater need of founding our judgment about these works on
conjectures, which, however, are not so feeble that they are in every
way wide of the mark, I believe that I strayed not at all from the truth
(and I think that everyone who will consent to consider this question
discreetly will judge as I did), when I said above that the origin of
these arts was nature herself, and the example or model, the most
beautiful fabric of the world, and the master, that divine light infused
by special grace into us, which has not only made us superior to the
other animals, but, if it be not sin to say it, like to God. And if in
our own times it has been seen (as I trust to be able to demonstrate a
little later by many examples) that simple children roughly reared in
the woods, with their only model in the beautiful pictures and
sculptures of nature, and by the vivacity of their wit, have begun by
themselves to make designs, how much more may we, nay, must we
confidently believe that these primitive men, who, in proportion as they
were less distant from their origin and divine creation, were thereby
the more perfect and of better intelligence, that they, by themselves,
having for guide nature, for master purest intellect, and for example
the so lovely model of the world, gave birth to these most noble arts,
and from a small beginning, little by little bettering them, brought
them at last to perfection? I do not, indeed, wish to deny that there
was one among them who was the first to begin, seeing that I know very
well that it must needs be that at some time and from some one man there
came the beginning; nor, also, will I deny that it may have been
possible that one helped another and taught and opened the way to
design, to colour, and relief, because I know that our art is all
imitation, of nature for the most part and then, because a man cannot by
himself rise so high, of those works that are executed by those whom he
judges to be better masters than himself. But I say surely that the
wishing to affirm dogmatically who this man or these men were is a thing
very perilous to judge, and perchance little necessary to know, provided
that we see the true root and origin wherefrom art was born. For since,
of the works that are the life and the glory of the craftsmen, the first
and step by step the second and the third were lost by reason of time,
that consumes all things, and since, for lack of writers at that time,
they could not, at least in that way, become known to posterity, their
craftsmen as well came to be forgotten. But when once the writers began
to make record of things that were before their day, they could not
speak of those whereof they had not been able to have information, in a
manner that there came to be first with them those of whom the memory
had been the last to be lost. Even as the first of the poets, by common
consent, is said to be Homer, not because there were none before him,
for there were, although not so excellent, which is seen clearly from
his own works, but because of these early poets, whatever manner of men
they were, all knowledge had been lost quite 2,000 years before.
However, leaving behind us this part, as too uncertain by reason of its
antiquity, let us come to the clearer matters of their perfection, ruin,
and restoration, or rather resurrection, whereof we will be able to
discourse on much better grounds.