cessor, almost with the same precision as was observable in the works of the Egyptians.

Giovanni Cimabue was both a painter and architect, he was born about the year 1240. Although it appears probable he originally studied under the Greek artists, who had been invited to Florence, yet he early deviated from their manner. Lanzi observes, he consulted nature, corrected in part the rectilinear forms of his design, gave expression to the heads, folded the drapery, and grouped the figures with much greater art than the Greeks. His talent did not consist in the graceful; his Madonnas had no beauty, his angels in the same piece have all the same forms. Wild as the age in which he lived, he succeeded admirably in heads full of character, especially in those of old men, impressing an indescribable degree of bold sublimity, which the moderns have not been able greatly to surpass. Vast and inventive in conception, he executed large compositions, and expressed them in grand proportions.

Giotto, another name eminent amongst the early painters of Florence, was a shepherd-boy; a sheep drawn by him from nature on a stone attracted the notice of Cimabue, who happened to see it as he was passing; Cimabue, with the consent of Giotto's father, took him to Florence for instruction. Giotto commenced by imitating, but quickly surpassed his master; through him, symmetry became more chaste, design more pleasing, and colouring softer than before: the meagre hands, the sharp pointed feet, and staring eyes, (remmants of the Grecian manner,) all acquired more correctness under him. If Cimabue is to be considered as the Michael Angelo of his age, Giotto was the Raphael. There is much learned controversy as to the share to which the two great Florentine artists, Cimabue and Giotto, are 'entitled as the founders of the modern school of painting in Italy. The impartiality and ingenuity with which this question has been investigated by Lanzi, entitles him of all others to the merit of being the best authority, and he decides that the improvement in painting is not due to Florence alone; that the career of human

genius in the progress of the fine arts is the same in every country. That when the man is dissatisfied with what the child learned, he gradually passes from the ruder elements to those which are less so, and from thence to diligence and precision, afterwards advancing to the grand and select, at length attains facility of execution. Such was the progress of the fine arts in Greece, and such has been that of painting in Italy.

The Pisani (one of whom has been before noticed as a sculptor) and their scholars preceded the Florentine painters, and diffused a new system of design over Italy. It would be injustice, observes Lanzi, to overlook them in the improvement of painting, in which design is of so much importance, or to suppose that they did not signally contribute to its improvement; again, if all the early Italian painters were to be exclusively derived from the two Florentine masters, every style of painting ought to resemble the style of those masters, yet in examining the old paintings of Siena, of Venice, of Bologna, and of Parma, they are found to be dissimilar in idea, in choice of colouring, and in taste of composition.

Lanzi's second proposition is, that if the improvement of painting was not solely due to the Florentines, yet no people excelled or contributed by example so much to the progress of art as they did; that Giotto was as much the father of the new method of painting, as Boccaccio was the father of the new species of prose composition; after the time of the latter any subject could be elegantly treated of in prose; after the time of the former painting could express all subjects with propriety. A Simon da Siena, a Stefano da Firenze and others, added charms to the art, but that they and others owe to Giotto the transitions from the old to a new manner. The services of Giotto were sought by the greatest potentates and families in every part of Italy, and after his death the same universal applause followed his disciples throughout Italy:thus becoming the model for the students during the fourteenth century, as was Raphael in the sixteenth, and the Carracci in the seventeeth century.

forms an æra in the history of art. His principles were founded on the works of Ghiberti and Donatello; he had acquired perspective from Brunelleschi, and had long studied the remains of ancient sculpture at Rome. From his works, it is apparent that he had made a great advance in diversifying the positions and characters; and in foreshortening his figures he appears to have studied the anatomy of the body more carefully than his predecessors. The expression of his heads is often graceful and elegant; he exhibits considerable freedom and simplicity in the folds and arrangement of his drapery, and much truth, variety, and delicacy in his colouring. His pietures became the study of all the best artists in his own time, and in that of Pietro Perugino, and of his great pupil Raphael. This artist died in 1443.*

Amongst the imitators of Masaccio, one of the most eminent was Ghirlandaio, the artist in whose school Michael Angelo studied; his works exhibit clearness and purity of outline, correctness of form, considerable invention and facility of expression; and he is considered by Mengs as the first Florentine who, by means of true perspective, was successful in grouping and in depth of composition.

These labours of the Tuscan painters bring us to the beginning of the sixteenth century, when much that was excellent in art had been attained by the careful study and imitation of nature, which had the effect of imparting more variety and life, especially to the heads. Indeed, the artists of later times have not much surpassed their predecessors in this respect. The whole, however, that was accomplished, amounted to little more than a careful imitation; ideal beauty, fulness and grandeur of design, harmony of colouring, aërial perspective, and variety and freedom, were still wanting, in order to carry the art to the perfection which it subsequently attained.

The taste for magnificent edifices having revived throughout Italy, many of the most splendid of those public and private buildings, which still remain at Rome, Florence, Milan, Mantua, and Venice, were erected about this period. The demand for ornamental architecture, as well as for interior embellishments, necessarily created a spirit of rivalry

The celebrated epitaph on Sir C. Wren, in St. Paul's, was borrowed from that on Masaccio, which is in the Carmelite Church in Rome, the walls of which he had painted in fresco.

"If any one seeks to know my tomb, or name, this church is my monument," &c.

and emulation amongst the artists of the times, and not only tended mainly to the advancement of the art, but probably called into action powers and genius which, at a less fortunate period, would have remained dormant. The schools of Italy, before this attainment of excellence by mutual emulation, strongly resembled each other, but having arrived at maturity, each began to display a marked and peculiar character. This soon became more conspicuous, from the introduction into Italy, about the middle of the fifteenth century, of the art of painting in oil, which enabled artists, in their smaller works, to obtain more brilliancy and depth. The invention of the arts of engraving on copper and wood was also one of the great causes of the advancement of design, by spreading over the whole of Europe the compositions of the great masters, whose works, till then, had been confined to a single spot.

Of the three great artists, whose genius was to bring to maturity all that was excellent in painting, and to expound and simplify the rules of art to their successors, Leonardo da Vinci appeared the first. He was born in 1432, twentythree years before Michael Angelo. His biographers concur in representing him as "endowed by nature with a genius uncommonly elevated and penetrating, eager after discovery, and diligent in the pursuit not only of what related to the three arts dependent on design, but to mathematics, mechanics, hydrostatics, music, and poetry. He was versed also in the accomplishment of horsemanship, fencing, and dancing. His manners were polished and affable, fitting him for the society of the great, with whom he lived on a footing of familiarity and friendship."

In addition to his great attainments as an artist, he was distinguished as a scientific writer; he was a discoverer in optics and mechanics; his hydraulic works on the Adda, which he rendered navigable for two hundred miles, continue to the present day monuments of his mechanical science. Some general observations contained in his writings, upon the inductive method of philosophizing, are almost couched in the same terms as were the great aphorisms which, in the succeeding age, rendered the name of Bacon immortal.

"Experiment," says he, "is the interpreter of the secrets of nature; it never sometimes deceive itself, we must conmisleads us. Though our reason may

sult experience; and vary the circumstances in our experiments until we can draw from them general rules, for it is from hence that these rules are to be derived." Again, " I am about to treat of a particular subject; but first of all I shall make some experiments; because my plan is to appeal to experience, and from thence to demonstrate why bodies are compelled to act in a certain manner. This is the method to be pursued by such as would investigate the phenomena of nature." His different memoranda on art abound with very useful observations on the mechanical powers and muscular action of the human frame. He was originally taught by Verrochio, an artist of some eminence; he soon, however, surpassed his teacher, though it is remarked that he retained through life traces of his early education, and that, like his master, he designed more readily than he painted; and that in his designs and countenances he seems to have prized elegance and vivacity of expression more than dignity and fulness of contour.

His mode of painting may be divided into two styles, one abounding in shadow, which gives admirable brilliancy to the contrasting lights; the other more quiet, and managed by merely having recourse to middle tints. In each, the grace of his design, the expression of the mental affections, and the delicacy of his pencil, have not yet been surpassed, or perhaps equalled. He appears, however, to have been more solicitous to advance his art than to multiply his pictures; a kind of timidity, and fastidiousness,-a longing after an excellence which he considered he could not attain-appear often to have induced him to leave his works unfinished, not being able to arrive at that truth which he considered necessary to perfection. In addition to his merit as a painter, he was eminent as a sculptor.

His life is usually divided into four periods; the first during the time he remained at Florence. The second was whilst he was at Milan, where he was invited by Ludovico Sforza, and where he is represented to have delighted every one by performing on a silver lyre (a new instrument of his own construction) no less than by his eloquence and his poetry. Here he remained till 1499, absorbed in abstruse studies and in mechanical and hydrostatical labours for the state. The seventeen years he spent at Milan, were after he had attained the maturity both of his age and fame, as he did not leave

Florence before he was thirty. Whilst there, however, he painted little except his celebrated picture of the Last Supper; but, during this period, he raised the school of Milan to great eminence by superintending an academy of the arts, which produced illustrious pupils.

This, and the production of his Last Supper (one of the greatest triumphs of art), render his stay at Milan one of the most important periods of his life. This picture is well known to all who take the slightest interest in the fine arts, by the celebrated engraving of Raphael Morghen. The picture itself has long been destroyed, but we are fortunate in having in this country (in the possession of the Royal Academy) a very fine copy of it by Oggione, and Sir Thomas Lawrence succeeded in collecting, at a great price, the studies made, as he conceived, by Da Vinci, for the different heads. After the misfortunes of Sforza, Leonardo returned to Florence, and during the thirteen years he remained there, painted some of his best works; and it was at this time that he executed the Cartoon of the Battle, which was designed to rival the work of Michael Angelo. He went to Rome at the time Leo X. became Pope, but remained there only for a short time; and it is stated that it was his procrastinating disposition and disinclination to finish his works, that caused Leo X. to withhold from him his patronage.

The history of the misfortunes which led to the destruction of this picture are curious-it was originally painted in oil instead of fresco; and from some defect in the oil or plaster, it soon peeled off, and was at various times retouched and repainted. The refectory of the convent in which it was painted was low and damp: the friars having no great esteem for this production, the middle of the wall on which it was painted being in a line with their kitchen, a door-way was cut through the picture. The chief destruction took place in 1770 by one Mezza, who actually scraped off all the remaining outlines of the picture, and restored heads of his own in all the figures. And in 1796, when the French occupied Milan, the refectory

was first a barrack and then for some years a magazine for forage; but notwithstanding this, in the year 1828, we saw a painter mounted upon an immense scaffolding, copying for some crowned head, with great care, this mere ghost of its former greatness. All that is known in reality of the picture is collected from tradition; and through the medium of several excellent copies, some of them by artists of note, who studied the original in the day of its greatest preservation. The one from which the celebrated engraving by Raphael Morghen was taken is from a fresco painted by suppressed convent at Castellazo, assisted, however, by sketches of Leonardo.

Marco d'Oggione, in 1514, at the refectory of a

It is remarkable that two judicious crities in this country have both mistaken the subject entirely. Mr. Addison calls it the Feast at Cana; and Mr. Roscoe considers the Saviour as in the act of dispensing the elements of bread and wine, and founding the Sacrament of the Supper.