Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

of its construction. The pope having attained the object of his ambition, soon found means, without breaking the letter of the treaty, to wreak his vengeance on those whom he hated, and who had opposed him. The offenders were not punished for opposing the power of the pope, the treaty protecting them in that respect; but they were found guilty on the pretext of having been enemies to the republic! Aware of his danger, Michael Angelo is said to have concealed himself for many days in the belltower of St. Nicholas to avoid the fury and the treachery of Clement. Some persons, however, state as a reason for the pope's especial anger against him, that he had proposed, during the defence of Florence, the razing the palace of the Medici. He was not mistaken in his view of the pope's clemency, for strict search was made for several days by order of Clement, who finding this unsuccessful, at last published a notice that he would let him remain uninjured, on condition he should proceed with the monument to the Medici. He was induced to confide in this assurance, trusting less to the good faith of the pope, than to his knowledge that it was Clement's eager desire the monuments and library should be completed.

There can be no doubt, from the accounts of both of his biographers, that Michael Angelo was constantly desirous of finishing the great monument to Julius which had been so long delayed; the orders and importunities of Leo the Tenth and of Clement, we have seen, had long prevented him from doing this, however he might wish it. The Duke of Urbino continued to urge him, and loaded him with unjust reproaches for having misapplied large sums of money received on account: this, on inquiry, turned out to be untrue, and the discovery had the effect of cooling the ardour of the duke, who found he should be obliged to contribute more funds. After much wrangling and negotiation, it was determined that the monument should be completed for the sum which had been actually received; and instead of an insulated work ornamented on all sides, on the scale originally proposed, the plan was altered and only the front façade was to be executed. The desire of Clement that he should proceed with the works at Florence, tended to facilitate this arrangement for the diminishing the work, as the pope's wishes, like those of Leo the Tenth, were considered by

all as laws. After much vexation and unjust treatment, it was stipulated that he should work four months at Florence and the remainder of the year at Rome.

On returning to Rome for this purpose, he received fresh orders from Clement, who commissioned him to make designs for painting the two ends of the Sistine chapel, the ceiling of which he had before painted under the patronage of Julius. Although he could not refuse the command, he delayed as much as possible making the cartoon of the Last Judgment, which was the subject chosen, whilst he proceeded by stealth with the statues for the monument. The death, however, in 1534, of Clement, released him from these commands. He then conceived the time was at last arrived when he should be at liberty to go on with the long delayed work; but even now he was disappointed. Paul the Third, the new pope, was no sooner elected, than he sent for him, expressing his desire that he should devote all his time to his service: this he declined, pleading his contract with regard to the unfinished monument. But Paul, who was old, and not willing to brook opposition, was not less determined to be obeyed than any of his predecessors. "What!" said he, "cannot I, now I am pope, command that which I have been wishing to attain for these thirty years! Where is this contract you talk so much about? I will tear it to pieces."

It appears, in order to rid himself of the importunity of the pope, Michael Angelo had determined to withdraw himself to Urbino, that he might in quiet complete the monument. Paul, however, was too eager for his services to let him thus escape; and early paid a visit of state, accompanied by ten cardinals, for the purpose of seeing all the statues which had been executed for the monument, and the sketches and cartoon for the Last Judgment. One of the cardinals seeing the statue of Moses, intended for Julius's tomb, in order to pay court to the pontiff, exclaimed, "This alone is enough to do honour to Pope Julius!" Paul again renewed his solicitations, and the Cardinal of Mantua, seeing that the cause of the artist's reluctance was the unfinished contract, undertook an arrangement with the Duke of Urbino, whereby only three statues were to be completed by Michael Angelo, and the rest were to be executed under his direction by others, he, how,

ever, paying the cost. Thus the plan and contract were changed for the fourth and last time, and Paul was enabled to gratify his eagerness to become the patron of the great artist. The monument to Julius, after all the various changes and the different impediments which have been noticed, was at last finished, and put up in St. Pietro in Vinculis. Of the seven statues of which it is composed, only three are the work of Michael Angelo, viz. the celebrated Moses,* and the two figures on the side personifying Virtue and Religion; the remaining four were the work of others. The other statues which were executed or begun for this monument were not used. The two which were completed are, or were, in the public collection at Paris; and the other four, which were only commenced, support the roof of a grotto in the Boboli gardens at Florence.

Paul, on the commencement of the painting of the Last Judgment, remunerated Michael Angelo by a considerable pension for life. The grant commences by stating that, "Wishing to remunerate you for the fresco painting representing the last judgment, in consideration of your labour and ability, which is an honour to our age; we promise," &c. This grand work was finished in 1541, and was opened at Christmas to the admiration of the world. In a future page, when considering the works executed by Michael Angelo, we shall lay before the reader the remarks both of Sir Joshua Reynolds and M. Fuseli on this picture, perhaps the most remarkable that was ever executed by any painter.

After the completion of the Last Judgment, the pope directed the painting in fresco of the walls of a chapel which had been built by San Gallo, and which was called the Pauline chapel. The subjects chosen were the Conversion of St. Paul, and the Crucifixion of St. Peter. The smoke of the tapers during the frequent celebration of high mass in this chapel, has so totally obscured these pictures that the subjects are now scarcely to be distinguished. These were the last works n fresco by Michael Angelo, then of the age of seventy-five years, who feeling his powers much diminished, complained to his friend Vasari that fresco painting was not a fit work for old men. Fuseli considers these as the dotage of his style, yet as possessing parts which

[blocks in formation]

make that dotage more enviable than the vigour of mediocrity.

San Gallo was the architect generally employed by the pope, but Michael Angelo's experience during the siege of Florence, was the cause of his being consulted respecting some fortifications of the castle of St. Angelo, then in progress. From the consciousness of his talents, he appears to have given his opinion freely on the proposed plans; and this so completely proved them to be erroneous that the works were never completed. This freedom however led to many disputes and jealousies between the rival artists. Though his age prevented his continuing to paint in fresco, Vasari states, that he continued to work in marble, saying that he found the exercise of the mallet and chisel necessary to keep him in health. After his last painting he commenced a large group, the principal figure of which was a dead Christ: this, though never entirely finished, was taken to Florence and placed behind the great altar in the me tropolitan church, where an inscription records that it was the last work in marble which he executed.

We are now arrived at that period of the life of Michael Angelo which is marked by his great work in architecture: he had already executed both in sculpture and painting the most extraordinary productions ever completed by any one man in any age; and at the age of seventy-five years was about, in a manner, to commence a new career.

What has hitherto been written has related to the painting and sculpture of Michael Angelo, we shall next have to consider him as an architect, particularly as regards his share in the construction of St. Peter's. Before, however, entering on this, we shall make some general observations on his works in sculpture and painting, prefacing these with a few remarks on the revival of painting in Italy.

It is not perhaps generally known that we possess in this country an unfinished bas relief by Michael Angelo, cut in marble; which was purchased in Italy by the late Sir George Beaumont, and by him bequeathed to the Royal Academy. It is of a circular form, consisting of three figures, representing the Virgin, the Infant Saviour, and St. John; it is composed with much grace. A small outline of this is added from a drawing made by the leave of the President of the Royal Academy. We may here be

permitted to regret, that some arrangement could not be made by which this, the cartoon of the Leda before noticed, and other valuable works possessed by the Academy, might be rendered generally accessible to the public. M. Ottley possesses a picture in distemper and a bust, both of which, according to his opinion and that of M. Fuseli, were executed by Michael Angelo.

CHAPTER VI.

On the revival of Painting in Italy. THE notices contained in the works of several of the most distinguished of the Italian historians, prove that there were painters in Italy during the dark ages, and Rome still possesses several specimens of art which prove this. Lanzi, in his history of painting in Italy, adduces in proof of this statement, amongst others, the two vast works un

rivalled by any others in Italy. The first is the series of popes, which, in order to prove the succession of the papal chair down to the time of St. Leo, this pontiff caused to be painted; a work of the fifth century, and which was subsequently continued until our own time.

The second is the decoration of the whole church of San Urbano, where there are several evangelical acts represented on the walls, along with some histories of the tutelar saint and St. Cecilia, a production which Lanzi considers as not partaking either of the Greek lineaments or style of drapery, and which, he says, may justly be attributed to an Italian pencil: this has subscribed

The materials for this chapter have been compiled from the translation by Mr. Thomas Roscoe, of the work of Lanzi, by far the most complete and satisfactory history of painting in Italy which exists.

upon it the date of 1011. The evidences afforded by the catacombs at Rome of the continued existence of art during the early ages has been already noticed.

The painters, however, of those times produced little else than mere mechanical efforts, chiefly following the examples afforded by the Greeks, and it was not till the improvement in sculpture, in the middle of the thirteenth century, that any sensible progress in painting is really discoverable.

Though the principal share in the honour of the revival of the arts is due to Tuscany, the Pisans led the way; as they were the first to throw off the trammels imposed by the Greek artists, and first began the study of the ancient monuments of Greek and Roman sculpture, and from these drew the true principles of art.

The improvement in sculpture was followed by that of the art of executing designs in Mosaic by Fra Jacopo, or Fra Mino da Turrita, also a Tuscan.

Lanzi says it is not known whether he was instructed in his art by the Romans or by the Greek workers of Mosaic; but that it is well ascertained he far surpassed them, and that on examining what remains of his works in Santa Maria Maggiore, at Rome, one the production of so rude an age, did not can hardly be persuaded that they were history constrain us to believe it; adding, that it appears probable he took the ancients for his models, and deduced his rules from the more chaste specimens the Roman churches, the design of of Mosaic still remaining in several of which is less crude, the attitudes less than were exhibited by the Greeks, who forced, and the composition more skilful ornamented the church of St. Mark at Venice.

It is common to date the revival of

the art of painting in Italy from the time of Cimabue, but the facts stated by Lanzi and several other modern writers, fully prove that before his time there had made some progress in the art, but were not only painters in Italy who that Pisa had a school for each of the

fine arts as early as the end of the eleventh century. Guinta, a Pisan, and Guido da Siena were amongst the most important artists, who appeared before the time of Cimabue, and who distinguished themselves by abandoning the tame and formal manner of the Greeks; in which one artist appears to have been content with an imitation of his prede

[graphic]

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, (remnants 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 paint ing 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.

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

CHAPTER VII.

The revival of Painting from the time of Cimabue and Giotto to that of Leonardo Da Vinci, M. Angelo, and Raphael.

THE works of the Italian writers on the fine arts are filled with long disquisitions on the causes which are supposed to have led to the improved style of Giotto; each party advancing some particular reasons for his theory, though it is evident that the true cause was the discovery, and study of the specimens of ancient Grecian sculpture. The effect of these on the productions of the Pisani, and others, (among the first who improved modern sculpture,) is sufficient to show that they were also the principal cause of the change of style in the arts of design and painting. A slight inspection of the works of Giotto manifests how much he was indebted to the newly-found monuments. The secret once discovered, it only required the

genius of such a painter to attain excellence. It was not, however, in the

Florentine school alone that this im

provement is discernible; an examination of the early pictures of the schools of Siena, Bologna, and Parma sufficiently shows that a similar cause was operating nearly at the same time in different places; and the progress of the art was rapid and universal throughout the whole of Italy.

The genius of Giotto, however, formed an era in the rapid advance of the Florentine school; his example incited others to exertion, and his disciples, by availing themselves of his discoveries, and following in his track, assisted in diffusing a knowledge of his principles and improved method; thus laying the groundwork for still higher perfection in the art, though in the capacity of humble imitators of his style.

Amongst the most important of the successors of Giotto, was Masaccio (Maso di S. Giovanni), a name which

D

« AnteriorContinuar »