(Vol. vii., pp. 524, 525.)
MR. SMIRKE's paper, questioning the received opinion as to the points of
time and circumstance {625} expressed in this celebrated fresco, contains
the following sentence:
"The work in question is now so generally accessible, through the
medium of _accurate_ engravings, that any one may easily exercise his
own judgment on the matter."
Having within no very distant period spent an hour or two in examining the
original, with copies lying close at hand for the purposes of comparison,
allow me to offer you a few impressions of which, while fresh, I "made a
note" in an interleaved copy of Bishop Burnet's curious _Tour in Italy_,
which served me as a journal while abroad. Burnet mentions the Dominican
Convent at Milan as in his day "very rich." My note is as follows:
"The Dominican convent is now suppressed. It is a cavalry barracks:
dragoons have displaced Dominicans. There is a fine cupola to the
church, the work of Bramante: in the salle or refectory of this convent
was discovered, since Burnet's time, under a coat of wash or plaster,
the celebrated fresco of Lionardo da Vinci, now so well known to the
world by plates and copies, better finished than the original ever was,
in all probability; certainly better than it is now, after abuse,
neglect, damp, and, worst of all, _restoring_, have done their joint
work upon it. A visit to this fresco disenchants one wonderfully. It is
better to be satisfied with the fine engravings, and let the original
live in its ideal excellence. The copyists have taken some liberties,
of which these strike me as the chief:
"First, The Saviour's head is put more on one side, in what I would
call a more languishing position than its actual one.
"Second, the expression of the figure seated at his left hand is quite
changed. In the copies it is a grave, serious, fine face: in the
original, though now indistinct, it evidently expressed 'open-mouthed
horror' at the declaration, 'One of you shall betray me.'
"Third, Judas in all copies is identified not only by the held bag of
money, but by the overturned saltcellar at his elbow. This last is not
in the original.
"The whole fresco, though now as well kept as may be, seems spoiling
fast. There is a Crucifixion at the other end of the same hall, in much
better preservation, though of the same date; and the doorway which the
tasteful Dominicans cut in the wall, through the bottom of the
painting, is, though blocked up, still quite visible. It is but too
probable that the monks valued the absurd and hideous frescoes in the
cloisters outside, representing Saint Dominic's miracles! and the
Virgin fishing souls out of purgatory with a rosary, beyond Lionardo's
great work."
So far my original note, written without supposing that the received idea,
as to the subject of the picture, had ever been questioned. In reference to
the question raised, however, I will briefly say, that, as recollection
serves me, it would require a well-sustained criticism to convince me that
the two disciples at the Saviour's right hand were not designed to express
the point of action described in the 23rd and 24th verses of chapter xiii.
of St. John's Gospel. Possibly MR. SMIRKE might favour us with the argument
of his MSS. on the group.