Dolce's Aretino and Venetian art theory of the Cinquecento b2773v97z

Table of contents :
Frontmatter
PREFACE (page 1)
INTRODUCTION (page 5)
APPENDIX A (page 63)
APPENDIX B (page 75)
TEXT AND TRANSLATION
The Dialogue on Painting (page 84)
Dedicatory letter of the Dialogue (page 196)
The letter of Dolce to Gasparo Ballini (page 200)
The letter of Dolce to Alessandro Contarini (page 212)
COMMENTARY
The Dialogue (page 219)
The letters (page 341)
ABBREVIATIONS (page 353)

Citation preview

MONOGRAPHS ON ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE FINE ARTS SPONSORED BY

AND |

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA

THE COLLEGE ART ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA

MONOGRAPH XV EDITOR BATES LOWRY

THE PUBLICATION OF THIS MONOGRAPH HAS BEEN AIDED BY A GRANT FROM THE SAMUEL H. KRESS FOUNDATION

ee CN A Comana taht Oi ee EE IE oecpee = , ‘ D Prt ————_—— ae SS ds bi

YB (Ce E> ao, \\ Ne nf, YM Uf ip tm ER” Wad eat ay FN ig ti SVN grain \ NSS Oh PRMNN ISR 2.

Lj, ZI YiyA‘ fis J, LSE iva it) ANG Hf, i ylSANS NN . . i) atae AU CS Al tiits Var ell BREN ANTS Zz Sti 1d Gel pst Micah ERS ant 7 an waa rAsG =e; ‘ SE ATR, Lammy

re oe 7. i nee 4 IN %: \___

f¢ (ne met NOY li "ihe @)\=gil) AN RN \Y eRe SIN OZ [ac ¥ tz Uf = \s aA NY (; 'aa/ {fee FBee >, WEeee \\ = anes iE GatPL )\4 NOD SS ;Bee

3

MeanGi. ON Le(ES£aE ti mr ewWwe aay ZS ONG wig ae HE 2 svsef4 = OQ ws LS ee “5 .an 2a a NQNGS 5 Se SO Bay Sqr =: WR Rl WEY < BUR\ SE SS // | EPP KOR oe ae=*Dy ie I \YC Nas) Sie age7 2S “ALS

gy. > ANS | RS IEW \. ‘ie ~rn2BSe~ iis Coe iiss = Oi.=/. oh A = ‘a | 4 \\ KeYE el * bd

"icone a | ma Gee Si | \: 10 SS

LSS SaSy!BRUNET SG)iysoy oA%; fo ; CPsen } ran SRST RAS \ \ i. \\ Ab cite ma) m (a i. aN = ape a regis - va i Be oT ty ;

ht Kd lar Se: Sa ses ANTIVIR” | AURAaY

SSqe SA a CUE LY, toe ag WSS GRAS ANWAR NN 7 7 /BRY Aicry fe Ste fas’ A aka fet ie oe pos 7 (eal o ri \\ PRN IN Ss Nile: | flar it eens DLA AHN) ye/ { eC) 2)ING, tAi » iN oJusa} AC ee, ca siWeneaY NA . ? C-fe,Ue, Hoy 4 |aaETT |yak tft|i‘ri al Ii

met ASS oHPay Rw) SS ein yt Og CAN ‘Ly sll ‘Pty v “ame oeUR hi aSen Na AY Hb \ j Hl . vt iWR\ NU yn MEAS ey‘kkiFFAM Na:ht+CAN ipPf e

OaEVEN tal 2| Sypoli Nf WR LAN : Ne o PS. 4 UBL ANN we ANC: va | AS i ‘ Nea =

INE NAIR ZR RAR STE Bo SE

Se ay) 7 RQ we Ros VEN Epics Sf BERENS.)

Saka) a PW \SBs A ais AR NS i Hy GINS EEN yy SEER hc SAE SHE SACS Ra). \\* w:iN AN SSWas" NS hes {lies TTA? ried vA \4 * Ne Sy neSNN WY\ ne 5 WY : 'g Ss FigsBANS ah R aus aff SS A NAN BL \ SYA, on Ys Teo))53 ag PAS SANS \ veOkW

CS) |) PPS EE SS TAS NS \ an i WORE Cty :

a naeSE | LeNR ZY Ee f := ES

eeeverene TSS a Meh iesasso,dat —— PO (p» Sn WT ry 3 o (all ‘ fi Mad da ag LLL

Ss Ay Lup ry Xe. are \ Lf :'\: ey. a OR Game Uta eaa ,TOOT sepa - , PIR Cy f / Gg 4 a>, an Unimaspiadecsgentqn ; - eee | ~§, Nan. Zi) TTI = 4et oe é A =4AAad ) , eccxx. Later, in 1568, Sansovino would

origini della critica d’arte a Venezia, take on an editorial task left in abeyance L’Arte, 26, 1923, 1ff.), and perpetuated by by Dolce’s death (see notes 3, 12 above).

later commentators. He was probably responsible for the pas-

230. See I, 65. sage in praise of Dolce’s character and 6 talent which (cf. appears in the resultant pub231.See vee C &,dT. 59 and 1, 04 lication Cicogna, 110f.), and he would 232. See TC, 55, and also p. 13. praise Dolce’s abilities as a letterato in

233. See TC, 13. his Venetia of 1581 (p. 276v; see also

See TC p. 47r there).

234. 960 th1 95: 244. For the argument that some sections of 235. See TC, 14. the Dialogue, at least, cannot have been 236. See TC, 54. composed before 1556, see C, 9, 25, 29.

Notes to the Introduction 59 245. B. Pino, Nuova scielta di Lettere, 1574, IL, wanted to play down Aretino’s apprecia-

200 (cited by Cicogna, 145f.). tion of Giulio’s talents. It may well be,

246. Camesasca, xxxii; for the re-addressing of therefore, that both accounts of how Giulio

this letter, see above, p. 34. came to be invited to Mantua are correct,

in the sense that Aretino and Castiglione 247. CE£.C, 4. were in fact jointly responsible for the

248. Camesasca, cclxiv. enterprise. For Aretino’s general relations

249. See TC, 20. with Federico, see A. Luzio, Pietro Aretino nei suoi primi anni a Venezia e la Corte

of coloring discussed in C, 62.

250. Cf. Dolce’s commitment to the principle dei Gonzaga, Turin, 1888, passim. 258. Cf. here E. H. Gombrich, “Zum Werke

251. See TC, 50. Giulio Romanos,” Jahrbuch der kunst-

252. See S. J. Freedberg, Parmigianino, Cam- historischen Sammlungen in Wien, 8,

bridge, Mass., 1950, 202. 1934, 95; 9, 1935, 124f. 253. Ibid., p. 8o. 259. A. Baschet, “Documenti inediti su Pietro 254. There is no evidence of personal contact Aretino,” Archivio storico italiano, III, 3 between Aretino and Parmigianino after (Florence, 1866), p. 125, letter xxiv. 1527. But it is worth remarking that Ti- 260. See the reference to this in Aretino’s lettian is thought to have perhaps met Par- ter of November 1544 to Luigi Anichini, migianino at Bologna in 1530 (ibid., p. 145 Camesasca, cxc. For the whole history of n. 2); and that Parmigianino visited Ven- the death mask, see ibid., i, ccxxxii, cclxiv— ice briefly at this time—going there with Ixv, cclxxix.

the Bolognese senator Lodovico Carbonesi ae 261. I[bid., ii.

to purchase marble and colors for one of the chapels in San Petronio at Bologna 262. LSPA, I, 1, xxxvii. (see A. E. Popham, BurlM, 91, 1949, 176). 263. Camesasca, xxx (of June 14, 1537, ac255. See TC, 40. It would seem that Dolce was knowledging news of Giulio’s arrival at in fact picking up here the real Aretino’s Modena and claiming that the artist should published defense of the engravings (Came- have written himself); tbid., lxi (Decemsasca, Ixviii); for the general line of argu- ber 6, 1537); LSPA, II, 1, liii. ment is markedly similar in both cases. 264. Camesasca, clxii; more will be said of this

256. See C, 4o for a fuller discussion of these later.

points. 265. Ibid., cc, ccx. For contact between Titian

257. Ricci, IV, 330. In his 1568 Vita of Giulio, and Giulio in the later 1530’s, and posVasari instead connects the invitation with sibly earlier, see C, 56 and J. Shearman,

Castiglione’s agency (Milanesi, V, 555). “Titian’s Portrait of Giulio Romano,” Presumably he did this on the basis of BurlM, 108, 1965, 172ff. the extant letter of August 1524 from Fed- __. erico to Castiglione and Castiglione’s cor- 266. T, 4of.

responding reply (Gaye, Carteggio, II, 267. The chief artistic source for these effects

155f.). However, he cut out in this 1568 was, in Correggio’s case, the work of version of the Vita the opening passage Mantegna and Leonardo; in Giulio’s case, which, in the 1550 version, is based on a the final phase in Raphael’s art; and in letter of Aretino’s (Camesasca, cxlii; cf. Parmigianino’s case, the art of Correggio

C, 72 here). This suggests that he now himself.

60 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

268. T, 49. 111ff. Vasari’s statement about the Leda 269. In 1532 he assisted at the drawing up of and Danae comes at Milanesi, IV, 115.

an act whereby Manfredo, Veronica’s hus- E. Verheyen has now made a fresh study band, appointed Paolo Brunono his proxy, of the Correggios at Mantua, suggesting for all fiefs held by the lords of Correggio how they went together and how and under Charles V; and on January 25, 1534 where they were hung: “Correggio’s he witnessed the settlement of 20,000 gold Amori di Giove,” JWarb, 29, 1966, 160ff. scudi on Chiara, daughter of Gianfran- 254, See on this point F. Saxl, “Titian and Arecesco da Correggio, on the occasion of her tino,” in Lectures, Warburg Institute, 1957, betrothal to Veronica’s son. See L. Pungi- I, 161ff. For similar tendencies in Aretino’s leoni, Memorie istoriche di Antonio Al- religious writings, see F. Weise, ‘“Manier-

legri detto il Correggio, Parma, 1818, I, istiche und Friihbarocke Elemente in den 247, 251. Earlier, in February 1525, Cor- religiosen Schriften des Pietro Aretino,” reggio had witnessed an act in the pres- in Bibliotheque d’humanisme et renaisence of Veronica (ibid., II, 193); and there sance, Geneva, 1957, 170ff. is a letter of September 3, 1528 from her to Isabella d’Este saying that a Magdalene 775: T, 41, 45.

in the Desert by the artist has just been 276. T, 50. completed (Venturi, IX, 2, p. 470).

270. Nicolini, Ixviii, cxxix, clxxxii, ccxxiv, 277. 1, 41. ccexlii (cf. also clix); LSPA, I, 1, cxcvi-cciii. 278. Ars Poetica, vv. gof.

aretine s letter of November 7, 1537 (= 279. See C, 4of. for Vasari’s parallel comments

amesasca, xlvii)letter enclosed a sonnet onthree he thr ot Titian. The earliest of Veronica’s on the artists.

to Aretino is from August 1533 (LSPA, I, 280. See Milanesi, VI, 223f. and VII, 670.

2, cxcv); and later there are isolated let- _ ters of Aretino’s from 1542 and 1544 281. For further details of the visit, see G.

(Nicolini, decxi; Lettere, III, 84v). Aretino Vasari, Il libro delle ricordanze, ed. A. wrote to the miniaturist Antonio da Cor- del Vita, Rome, 1938, 36-39. reggio in May 1548 (Camesasca, cdxlv). 282. See Milanesi, loc.cit.; Camesasca, cxxxvi 271. This is reported by the 17th century chron- (dated May 8, 1542).

icler Luccio Zuccardi. There is also a rec- _ 5 ord of work by Correggio in the palace of 283. Cf. here C, 49 and note 257 above.

Francesco di Brandenburg; but the surviv- 284. For a full account of their relationship, ing murals show no trace of his hand. See see L. Venturi, “Pietro Aretino e Giorgio on both points C. Ricci, Antonio Allegri Vasari,” in Mélanges Bertaux, Paris, 1924.

da Correggio, London, 1897, 85. 285. Camesasca, cvii (dated December 15, 272. Alfonso d’Avalos, in a letter to Aretino 1540); for Dolce’s borrowing, see TC, 21.

dated November 2, 1531 (LSPA, I, 4, cviii) . . .

begs him to get Titian to come to Correg- 286. For the teflection of this dual allegiance gio, which may be relevant. in Aretino’s writings about art, see K. Vossler, “Pietro Aretinos kunstlerische

273. For the presence of all these works at Bekenntniss,” Neue Heidelberger JahrMantua, see W. Suida, Correggio e Tizi- bucher, 10, 1900, 38ff. ano,” in Manifestazioni nel IV Centenario della Morte di Correggio, Parma, 1936, 287. Ed. Palluchini, 131.

Notes to the Introduction 61 288. Letter of Leoni’s to Francesco Montemez- the results of Vasari’s change of heart zano, sent from Rome on August 6, 1589, about Venice, see Apx. A, p. 65. first published in Lettere familiare di Gio-

vanni Battista Leoni, Venice, 1600, 15; 294: see C, 14.

53f. 295. Tietze, pl. 279.

reprinted by Bottari-Ticozzi, Raccolta, V, .

289. Camesasca, cclxiv. 296. Cf. here J. Shearman, ““Maniera as an Aesthetic Ideal,” in The Renaissance and

290. Ricci, IV, 341 (cf. C, 6). Mannerism (Studies in Western Art, Acts ; of XX International Congress of the His291. Ibid., IIL, 20f. and IV, 236f. tory of Art), Princeton, 1963, 200ff. Also

292. Ibid., IV, 298ff. his Mannerism, Penguin Books, 1967, 15ff. 293. The friendship between Vasari and Are- 297. CF. S. J. Freedberg, “Observations on the

tino seems to have continued after this Painting of the Maniera,” AB, 47, 1965, date, but on colder and more formal 187ff., and especially pp. 195-97.

terms. Aretino wrote to Vasari in 1543, in 1545 Vasari sent Aretino his renewed 298. E. Panofsky in his Idea (Berlin, 1960 ed.,

compliments and in 1548 he dispatched a 44f.) puts his discussion of Dolce within portrait of Aretino’s mother, asking at the his chapter on Mannerist art theory. For same time for a poem by Aretino for his C. H. Smyth’s interpretation of a particu1550 edition; Aretino, however, pleaded lar passage in the Dialogue as evidence of overwork. (See Venturi, op.cit., for the what “Mannerism” entailed in the judgrelevant references.) For a discussion of ment of the mid-16th century, see C, 47.

APPENDIX A

The subsequent history and influence of the Dialogue

The earliest literary reference to the Dialogue seems to be the mention of it in an unpublished treatise by the Milanese artist and theorist Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo. The original

autograph draft of this treatise, entitled Gli sogni e raggionamenti, is in the British Museum,’ and it includes a section on painting. There Lomazzo writes of “certo Dialogo (che) poco fa scrisse Lodovico Dolce”; so the draft can be dated, on this basis, around 1560. The point of the reference is twofold. First, Lomazzo charges Dolce with having praised Titian excessively, at the expense of Michelangelo’s deserts. The reason which he puts forward for this undue adulation is that Dolce “fu aiutato in certi luoghi importanti del suo compar Titiano.” It is unlikely, in principle, that this had really been the case; and it is equally unlikely that Lomazzo had any firm information about Dolce’s sources to draw on. Presumably, then, he was simply giving voice to a general or personal belief, based on the content of the Dialogue. And it is interesting that this belief carried with it, for Lomazzo, the implication that Dolce was a completely authoritative and unimpeachable source, when it came to the details of Titian’s career and his production. A few pages later, that is, he put into his draft an account of Titian’s life and art which is based, almost word for word, on Dolce’s biography of the artist. In sum, this early treatise of Lomazzo’s, composed only a short while after the Dialogue’s original appearance, already drives a wedge between the value of Dolce’s total critical argument and the reliability of his facts. In doing this, it adumbrates the two main directions in which use of the Dialogue will split as time goes on. It is possible that in Venice itself Francesco Sansovino took Dolce’s text into account when it came to expanding, for the guide to the city which he brought out in 1561,? the

section on art included in the 1556 version of that text. He lengthened his account of the work of Pordenone, that is, so that it now included one of the fresco decorations which Dolce had specifically mentioned. And it may equally be that, when it came to naming promising Venetian artists of the younger generation, Sansovino thought of himself as emending Dolce’s opinion on this subject; for along with Battista Franco, Dolce’s own choice in this connection, he now mentions Veronese, Schiavone and Licinio.

Much more consequential, however, is the use of the Dialogue in the preparation of Vasari’s 1568 edition. When Vasari came to plan that enlarged second edition of the Vite, he set himself to covering the great “third age” of painting far more comprehen-

64 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

sively than before. Dolce’s text had, in the meantime, argued at great length and in an outspoken way for the outstanding importance of Venice’s contribution here ; and Vasari had not in fact been back to that city since his period of residence there in 1541-1542. Granted this double pressure, then, one can readily understand why Vasari paid a fresh visit to Venice in 1566.° He evidently felt that it was incumbent on him to take a careful look at the newer developments in Venetian painting. And he records how, in this connection, he called at Titian’s studio and looked over the pictures that were to be seen there.

Profiting from that visit, Vasari then put together an “account of the principal works of Titian” for inclusion in his 1568 publication.t The reason for this title is that, while he was now offering the reader a whole chapter about Titian’s art—in place of his brief mention of the artist in his 1550 edition—he was not doing this in the shape of a biography of his usual kind. Rather, he was stringing together descriptions of Titian’s works which he had seen and studied personally. He did, however, weave in with those descriptions a certain amount of biographical detail. And here it is quite evident that he was helped by the existence of the Dialogue. For while some of the facts which he gives are ones which he had gleaned from Titian and his entourage during his visit of 1566,5 and others come from his knowledge of special commissions which the artist had received outside of Venice, his account of Titian’s early training is certainly based, in large measure, on the corresponding section of Dolce’s biography.® Similarly the heavy contrast that Vasari makes between Bellini and Titian, in the course of his description of the camerino d’alabastro at Ferrara,” may have been suggested by Dolce’s opening comparison between these two artists. And it may well be that, in a more general sense, the Dialogue had already served as a stimulus to Vasari during his trip to Venice, by indicating to him which particular works of Titian’s there deserved his attention most. For Vasari presents the Martyrdom of St. Peter in his text as an absolutely commanding achievement by the artist; and Dolce had used this same picture to launch his argument.®

Elsewhere in the 1568 edition there are new additions which may well have been fostered by Vasari’s reading of the Dialogue. The work of Aenea Vico Parmigiano, the engraver, which had received only a brief mention in the 1550 edition, is now discussed

in considerable detail, and it is quite possible that this expansion was specifically prompted by Dolce’s high commendation of Vico’s achievement.’ Again, Vasari now cites, in his Vita of Michelangelo, the opinion of Biagio da Cesena that the Last Judg-

Appendix A 65 ment was an indecent work,!° and the words which he ascribes to this man add up to exactly the same criticism as Dolce had voiced through the mouth of his Aretino. There is also, it should be added, one case in which Vasari picks up a turn of phrase found in the Dialogue.!4

As with Lomazzo, however, there was another side to Vasari’s attitude in his second edition. Since 1550, he had come to feel with an increasing sense of rancor that Venice had not received his art as it should have done in 1541-1542. Seeking an explanation for that supposed rejection, he found it—since his art was directly modeled on the example of Michelangelo—in the idea that Venice was opposed to what Michelangelo basically stood for in the field of painting. The consequences are well known. It is now hammered home—both in the revised shape of the Cinquecento Vite and in many indi-

vidual judgments—that the art that matters most in the third age of painting is the difficult art which rests securely upon the foundations of disegno. Without such foundations, the grazia and facilita which derive from inborn talent can lead only to a minor level of achievement; and prolonged and assiduous studio is a prerequisite of the highest reaches of perfection, where grazia and facilita emerge of themselves. These latter qualities, then, are no less highly regarded than they were in the 1550 edition; but the theoretical emphasis has changed.’* And there is a corresponding change in Vasari’s treatment of Venetian painting. Whereas in his 1550 edition he had been as complimentary toward it as his terms allowed, he is now distinctly critical, making it plain that, in the ultimate hierarchy of art, Venetian painting quite simply cannot be compared with the central Italian achievement. Thus, after showing little further interest in the art of Giorgione, he expands his account of Sebastiano’s Venetian career in

such a way as to make more of a point of how, when this artist moved to Rome, a praiseworthy color practice learnt from Giorgione was his only important asset. Stress is laid on the slipshod character of Tintoretto’s maniera, and on the romuanita of Venetians such as Battista Franco.’® Lastly and most crucially, the absence of diseeno in the work of Titian is brought out by dint of several sharp-edged comments. All of this, then, implicitly represents Vasari’s answer to the Venetian argument which had found expression in the Dialogue. In his Idea del tempio della pittura of 1580 Lomazzo again made use of Dolce’s text.

He specifically mentions it there as a valuable theoretical manual, and later in the treatise he gives an evaluation of Titian’s color practice which seems to follow along the

66 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

lines of Dolce’s comments on this subject.!* Evidently, then, he found the Dialogue useful when it came to formulating afresh the basic principles of good painting: and the same may well have been the case with Borghini in 1584 and Armenini in 1586.15 But

Dolce’s treatise was, it should be added, only one of several treatises of the earlier Cinquecento which Lomazzo regarded in this way; for he cites along with it the writings of Pino, Varchi and Biondo. Gregorio Comanini again drew on the Dialogue directly in his I] Figino, ovvero del fine della pittura, published in Mantua in 1591. This text consists of a debate between

a theologian, a poet and a painter—Figino himself—and it is in the last part, where Figino takes over the lead, that the borrowings in question occur.!® When propriety and impropriety come under review, that is, various examples are cited, and they include three which Dolce had adduced: Donatello’s rendering of Christ on the Cross, the rep-

resentation of Moses striking the rock, and Diirer’s depiction of Jews who look like Germans. The discussion then passes on to Michelangelo’s representation of Christ as beardless, which had again been one of the improprieties strictured in the Dialogue. Mention is made of how some people had objected to this, and also of the way in which the blessed are shown in the Last Judgment. Martinengo, as the theological expert, then offers a way of rescuing Michelangelo from this line of attack, and Figino, in replying, actually cites the Dialogue without giving its author’s name: “Con molta destrezza e

con molta acutezza d’ingegno voi vi siete argomentati di sottraere il Buonarotto allV’accuse dategli da un compositore d'un certo Dialogo, in cui mette in bilancia il suo valore

con quello di Raffael Sanzio.” Correspondingly, one can take it that Dolce was one of the calumniatori of Michelangelo who are anonymously mentioned soon after. Here, then, one has what seems to be the earliest case of Dolce’s arguments being revived and re-used in the continuing controversy about Michelangelo’s preeminence. And Comanini may also have drawn on the pure theory contained in the Dialogue. For there is a very Dolcean passage later on about the variety which is overly contrived. The term sprezzatura is also used—though this could have come from Tasso, Comanini’s chief source. There are a good number of indications that the Dialogue went on being used as a reference manual throughout the seventeenth century. First, a pen copy of it exists in Paris, in the Arsenal Library, which has been dated to this period.*” Second, Romano Alberti and Federico Zuccaro take up Dolce’s definition of painting, rather critically, in their Origine e progresso dcll’Accademia del Disegno di Roma, published at Pavia in

Appendix A 67 1604.'8 Third, it is said that the painter Carlo Maratta (1625-1713) was an admirer of the treatise.’ Fourth, the Spanish theorist Francesco Pacheco drew upon it in substantial ways when composing his Arte de la pintura, which was completed in 1638 and published in 1649.*° Fifth, the French theorist Roland Fréart de Chambray did the same in his Idée de la perfection de la peinture, published in 1662.*! The critique of Michelangelo’s Last Judgment and the corresponding praise of Raphael in this work are based to a very considerable extent on Dolce’s contentions. Sometimes, indeed, the phrasing is virtually identical; and the dependence may also extend, in more general terms, to De Chambray’s critique of Diirer. Sixth, another French theorist, Félibien, cites Dolce as one of those who had criticized Michelangelo, in a marginal note to his Entretiens of 1660-1681.” Finally, the Italian Carlo Malvasia can be added to the list of writers

interested in Dolce’s art theory, on the evidence of his Felsina pittrice, published at Bologna in 1678. In his life of Francesco Albani in this work Malvasia proposes that, among the five parts of painting which he names, disegno should be ranked on a level with invenzione; he cites to this end (with several minor deviations from the actual text) the following passage of Dolce’s: “Una brutta forma toglie ogni laude a qual si voglia bellissima inventione: ne basta a un Pittore di esser bello inventore, se non é parimente buon disegnatore.”*? No doubt such examples of seventeenth century interest in

Dolce’s work could be multiplied. And the international range of this interest is certainly impressive—particularly since copies of the 1557 text, which had never been reissued, had apparently become somewhat scarce by this time.?4 Side by side with this pattern of respect for Dolce’s theory, the biographical details which he provided on the subject of Titian’s career were treated afresh as authoritative. Ridolfi made use of them, that is, in his Meraviglie of 1648,25 and Boschini would do the same in his Ricce miniere of 1674. By now, on the other hand, the 1622 publication of the so-called Anonimo di Tizianello was also available, and this second source of information about Titian carried at least equal weight with the biographers just mentioned. In response to the problem of the Dialogue’s availability, a second edition finally did appear in 1735. It was issued in Florence under the imprimatur of Nestenus and Moucke,

with the Italian text (accurately reproduced for the most part)27 on the left-hand side and a French translation on the right. The translation for this 1735 edition was done by Nicolas Vleughels (1668-1737), son of the painter Philip Vleughels, a painter himself, and director of the French Academy

68 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

in Rome from 1724 to the end of his life.*8 In view of his official status, there is a strong presumption that Vleughels also wrote the unsigned and undocumented preface. It be-

gins with an account of the need for a new edition—at once because the original has become rare and forgotten*? and because the work constitutes an admirable guide for the contemporary artist intent on achieving le beau. “Ce livre est recommendable,” the author writes, “par les préceptes qu'il contient, & par les raisonnements justes, & solides qu’on y trouve,” and again, “L’auteur ... par tout instruit, par tout enseigné, prouve clairement la verité des propositions qu'il avance, & fournit généralement a tout ce qu’on peut désirer; il connoit tres bien le beau, en parle scavamment, enseigne le moyens de la connoitre, & d’y parvenir, & par des chemins agréables, conduit a gouter l’excellent, & a fuir ce qui y est opposé.’’° The remainder of the preface is then given over to a critique

of the factual errors and general misrepresentations found in some recent writings which the author has seen on painting and on the art of antiquity.24 The purpose of these strictures is presumably to point up the contrasting reliability of the Dialogue, and Dolce’s equally contrasting breadth of treatment. These qualities imply, it is suggested, that the ideas in the treatise are those of some great artist, to whom Dolce “prétait sa plume.” Vleughels seems to have succeeded well enough in his avowed aim of bringing the Dialogue back to the attention of artists and thinkers. His official position implies that the work won notice in the orbit of the French Academy, and it evidently aroused fresh interest in other countries as well. A Dutch translation appeared in 1756, a German one the following year;?? and then in 1770 an important English translation came out in London. This, together with a preface and copious notes to the text, was the work of one W. Brown.®*

Brown was especially interested in tying in Dolce’s art theory with French, English and German theory of more recent date. Indeed, he did everything that he could to point up the close relationships between them and the common ground which they shared. He freely embroidered his translation in certain places,?* so as to bring in seventeenth and eighteenth century ideas about narrative composition and the flavor of contemporary interest in nature’s romantic aspects. He also added further notes to the ones which he took over from the 1735 edition. These consist of comparable passages culled from the writings of latter-day French and English theorists.3°> And the general argument of

the preface is that the Dialogue should prove helpful to the “English school’ now

Appendix A 69 emerging in place of the French and Italian schools which still flourished a few decades back. For what Dolce wrote (under the guidance, it is said, of Raphael as well as Aretino) can be taken as foreshadowing the whole concept of the belle idée. In this light, then, his argument gives grounds for believing that the period from Poussin to the end of Louis XIV’s reign should in fact be regarded as the fourth great age of painting.?® However, eighteenth century writers were sometimes less respectful in their attitude toward the Dialogue. In his Laocoon, published in 1766, Lessing took Dolce severely to task for having praised Ariosto’s description of Alcina as the work of a “painting

poet.’ In fact, he maintained, Ariosto was not speaking as a poet there, but rather as a drawing-master to his pupils. In 1768 Giacomo Carrara disparagingly wrote to Giovanni Bottari that Dolce’s critique of Michelangelo could be ignored, “perche ognuno sa che il Dolce, che forse nulla s‘intendeva della pittura, il tutto scrisse a dettatura del Aretino.’’*® Here again, then, one has the idea that some greater mind than Dolce’s had been responsible for the Dialogue’s content; and one sees by now that this unsupported contention could cut both ways. D’Azzara, in his text of 1780 on the art of Mengs, also referred to the treatment accorded to Michelangelo in the Dialogue, saying that Dolce had noted this artist’s failings without understanding the real reason for them.®® The operating factor in this case was clearly Mengs’ own emulation of Raphael.

In 1813 Bartolommeo Gamba reprinted Dolce’s letter to Contarini, on the grounds that it was notable in itself and contained a just estimate of Titian.t° This letter and the one to Ballini had already been republished in Italy in the later eighteenth century, in the Lettere pittoriche which contain other mentions of Dolce; and Bottari and Ticozzi would print them once again in 1822-1825.‘ Correspondingly, Andrea Maier’s Dalla imitatione pittorica ... came out in Venice in 1818, and in the second and third parts of this text, where Maier is discussing Titian’s work and commenting on Ticozzi’s life of the artist, there are a number of references to the Dialogue.*? At the same time the polemic about Michelangelo continued into the early nineteenth century, and Dolce’s views on this subject went on serving as critical tinder. Lanzi in his Storia pittorica delItalia, published at Bassano in 1795-1796, had asserted that Michelangelo was not at all the weak colorist that Dolce had claimed him to be; and Cicognara, in his history of sculpture which came out in Venice in 1813-1818, quoted Dolce’s condemnation of the Last Judgment in order to take rather similar exception to the concept of propriety underlying it.*

70 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Then it is of some special interest that Eugéne Delacroix knew and admired the Dialogue. The entry in his Journal for August 25, 1850 includes lines from two adjacent speeches of Aretino’s about the power of painting to please, and the one for January 15, 1857 similarly reproduces lines about the supremacy of Titian over Raphael and Michelangelo.** Delacroix squarely assumed that the Dialogue represented the real Aretino’s opinions made public in textual form. This is made clear twice over. In the 1850 entry, that is, quoting from the French translation which had been published in 1735, he refers to his source book as “Dialogues de I’Arétin sur la peinture’; and he prefaces his second set of extracts with the words: “Arétin, dans un dialogue instructif sur les peintres de ce temps, apres avoir detaillé avec admiration quantité de ses [i.e., Titian’s] ouvrages, s‘arréte en disant... ,” etc. Further, this second entry suggests that Delacroix’s familiarity with Dolce’s remarks about the marvels of Titian’s color may have helped to shape his own theoretical emphasis on color rather than drawing. Three fresh editions of the Dialogue appeared in the later nineteenth century (two of them Italian, the third one German) ;*° and Crowe and Cavalcaselle, followed by others, made excellent use of the information which Dolce provided about Titian in their systematic attempt to piece together this artist’s oeuvre. In the first decades of this century two further editions were published,*® and there followed the first serious attempts to appraise the Dialogue from a critical and historical point of view.*? The authors of these latter studies made very valuable contributions, particularly as regards the place of the Dialogue in the development of Cinquecento art theory. But they were all inclined to overrate Dolce’s intelligence and powers of thought —a tendency which, as has been shown, already affected the discernment of much earlier writers. They also did not look carefully enough into the sources of Dolce’s mate-

rial; and they tended correspondingly to lay weight on the polemic message of the Dialogue at the expense of the components which went into its making. The more recent commentators have, by and large, followed in their footsteps in these three respects.*®

NOTES TO APPENDIX A

1. Add. MS 12,196. Bound in with the Sogni 11. “Comparisons are odious”; see TC, 3.

is “Umberto e Filomena,” a poem in of- .

tava rima. The British Museum catalogues ** The following “hte arisons between the

the treatise as handwritten by Lomazzo. 4590 and an editions here as Tepe

The section on painting was used by E. resentative il ra land: “ he |

Battisti in his article “Un inedito ritratto (a) Ricci, IV, 256, °° Soghant: Pere “he di Leonardo,” published in his volume en- maniera Sua molto piacque allo universale, titled Rinascimento e Barocco (Rome, faccendo egli arie pietose e devote secondo 1960, pp. 246ff.). Although no manuscript l’uso de gli Ipocriti. ws becomes (Milanumber is given there, I was able to track nesi, V, (132): perene ome to P ne ed “8 down the treatise from the bare statement sua maniera, facendo ] arle pietose € he that it was in the British Museum; and I quel modo che Pracerone 2 coloro c “7

also owe to that article the suggestion senza dilletarsi delle fatiche dell arte,

that the treatise dates from ca. 1560. The amano le cose oneste, facili, dolci e graziose. two quotations that f ollow are from p. (b) Ricci, IV, 297, of Parmigianino: “fece

117v the manuscript; thebenefici account ofi ade di ; Titian’s of art begins at p. 134v. Francesco all arte tanta grazia nelle figure sue, che chi quella imitasse,

2. F. Sansovino, Delle cose notabili che altro che augmento nella maniera non si sono in Venetia, Venice, 1561. The par- farebbe.” For this one finds substituted

ticular passages to which IJ refer are at (Milanesi, V, 235): “Se Francesco, il quale pp. 17v and 18r; for a more specific ac- ebbe della natura bella e graziosa maniera count of the expansions in question, see e spirito vivacissimo, avesse sequitato di

C, 50 and 56. fare giornalmente, avrebbe acquistato di mano in mano tanto nell’arte, che si come

3. The journey is referred to at Milanesi, diede bella e graziosa aria alle teste e

VIL 460. molto leggiadria, cosi avrebbe di perfe-

4. Ibid., 425f. zione, fondamento nel disegno ce VU, avanzato se distesso e glie bonta altri.” 5. E.g. from Verdezotto (cf. C, 22). 13. Milanesi, VIL s71ff. and 587. 6. See C, pai. One particularly indicative 14. G. P. Lomazzo, Idea ..., Bologna, 1785 point which I mention there is Vasari’s d. 16 repetition of the anecdote about Géior- CG BOr 4 Ae gione’s chagrin when the Fondaco frescoes 15. R. Borghini, I! Riposo, Florence, 1584;

were unveiled. G. B. Armenini, De’ veri precetti della 7. Milanesi, VII, 433ff. Cf. Dolce at T, 1, and pittura, Ravenna, 1586. also pp. 16f. 16. G. Comanini, Il Figino ..., in Trattati Cinquecento, ed. P. Barocchi, 8. See C, 1. III, 1962, 350ff.d’arte Thedelpassage quoted is

9. See C, 13. from p. 352, the atterm sprezzatura is used p. 362 (cf. Barocchi’s notes in these

to. Milanesi, VII, 211; compared by Barocchi two cases) and the discussion of variety with T, 40. (G. Vasari, La vita di Michel- comes at pp. 363f. The passages in the angelo nelle redazioni del 1550 e del 1568, Dialogue which match Comanini’s examed. P. Barocchi, Milan-Naples, 1962, III, ples of impropriety are at T, 18f., 20 and

1297). (in the case of Michelangelo), T, 42.

72. Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

17. A. Marsand, I Manuscritti italiani della 23. C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice, Bologna, Regia Biblioteca Parigina, Paris, 1838, II, 1678, Il, 223 (1841 ed., II, 149). For the 269ff., Entry No. 919 (cited by Cicogna, source of the quotation, see T, 24.

Pe 243). Palen ies panied by a 24. See the comment on this subject in the notes that the two manuscripts are pre- preface to the 1735 ed., which is menceded by a letter from a certain M. Joly, tioned below. dated February 20, 1768. In this letter 25. He also asserts that Dolce was a friend

. . ; ice, 1622.

Joly offers the whole, by way of a gift, to of Tintoretto’s (Von Hadeln, II, 69). Mariette, secretary to the King and Mem- 36. Compendio della vita del famoso Titiano ber of the French Academy of painting Vecellio di Cadore, Veni

and sculpture. This explains how an Italian transcript of the Dialogue came to rest 27. Despite the apology for errors inserted at

in Paris. Cf. also Mariette’s citation of the back of the volume (pp. 306ff.). Dolce’s opinion about Michelangelo in a publication of his own: P. J. Mariette, 28. See the biographical entry in G. Campori, Abécédario, Archives de Vart francais, Lettere artistiche inedite, Modena, 1866,

1851-53, I, 226. 152f. Vleughels was a friend of Rosalba Carriera (in whose diary he receives men-

18. See p. 24 (p. 36 in the reprint, ed. D. Hei- tion), of Crozat and also of Watteau.

kamp, Florence, 1961). Jean de Julienne states that Watteau lodged with him for a time prior to 1718

19. This is claimed in the 1770 edition of the 5 an ot cnn KIN seib, ane Dialogue discussed below; see note to p. references given there. iv. 29. Whereas the treatises of Borghini and 20. See the following pages in the ed. of F. J. Bellori have been reissued in Florence and Sanchez Canton, Madrid, 1956: I, 78, 95, Naples respectively, and there have been 258, 274f., 276, 281, 287, 344f., 348f., 360F., three new editions of Vasari’s Vite (p. 13). 389, 404, 413, 435, 443, 448ff., 452f., 459; 30. These two passages come at p. 3 and p. 9;

II, 165. the third quotation, below, is from p. 11. 21. The relevant passages come in the preface 31. In particular, three volumes prepared in and at pp. 55f. and 66. I draw here on an London and published by Herman Wytner

article by Sir Anthony Blunt which he of Amsterdam in 1728; and a letter that

kindly drew to my attention: “The Legend the author had received from Versailles of Raphael in Italy and France,” Italian in May 1727 (see the note to p. 23, and p.

Studies, 12, 1958, 1ff. (see pp. 5-7 and p. 61).

a1). Cf. also J. Thuillier, Polemiques ae, 32. The Dutch version was by Jacobus de

tour de Michel-Ange au XVIlIe Siécle, h: the C ‘s found in S

XVIle Siécle, 36-37, 1957, 368ff. Jongh;lung t e German one is found in ammvermischter Schriften zur Beforderung der schonen Wissenschaften, ed. C.

22. A. Félibien, Entretiens sur les ouvrages Nicolai.

des plus excellentes peintres anciens et modernes, 2nd ed., Paris, 1685, I, 504 (II, 33. The fact that this man has so common a

284 in the original ed.). surname, and that only one initial is

Notes to Appendix A 73 given, has made it impossible so far to 43. L. Lanzi, Storia, Florence, 1834 ed., I, 118

trace his identity. A reprint of this edition (cited by Barocchi, op.cit., Il, 484f.); L.

was issued from Glasgow in 1870. Cicognara, Storia della Scultura dal suo

Risorgimento in Italia fino al Secolo di is admitted on p. xvi of the preface). For Canova, Prato, 1823-25, V, gtft. the weaving in of more recent concepts 44. Journal, ed. A. Joubin, Paris, 1932 ed., I, of narration see pp. 85f., where the ac- 414f. (citing lines which appear at T, 16); count of the Fall of Manna cartoon is ex- III, 5 (citing lines which are found at T,

34. E.g. at pp. 61f., 71, 73, 100 (the freeness

panded so that it incorporates Poussin’s 55f.) I am grateful to Dr. G. Mras for ideas about the representation of this sub- drawing my attention to these passages.

ject (Lettres de Poussin, ed. P. du Colom- nas tion of romantic ideas about nature, see 1871 ed., Vienna: Quellenschriften fur pp. 81f. Kunstgeschichte, II, tr. C. Cerri, notes by R. von Edelberg; 1895 ed., Perino. ec | Paris, 1929, 11f.); for the introduc- 45° 1863 ed.: Biblioteca Rara, ed. G. Daelli, X;

35.lowed The additional notes in question are folby the initials “J. E.” The authori- 46 1910 ed., Florence, ed. G. Battelli; 1913

ties cited in these notes include Du Fres- ed., Lanciano, ed. D. Ciampoli. noy, Lord Shaftesbury, Algarotti, Webb, 47. See especially the relevant passages in: De Piles, Richardson, Du_ Bos, Winckel- K. Birsch-Hirschfeld, Die Lehre von der mann, Spence, Le Brun, Dryden, L’Abbeé Malerei im Cinquecento, Rome, 1912, ch. de Marsy, Watelet and even (p. 169) some i; M. Pittaluga, “Le origini della critica

Italians. del colore,” L’Arte, 20, 1917-18, 240ff.; S.

36. See pp. ii and iii of the preface, and the Ortolani, “Le origini della critica d’arte a

notes to pp. 36, 70, 115, 137. Venezia,” L’ Arte, 26, 1923, 1ff.; L. Venturi,

. “La critique d’art en Italie a l’epoque de la

37. See ch. xx. The work was written in 1760- Renaissance” (pt. iii), GBA, 9, 1924, 34ff.

65. Cf. also the prefaces to the two editions

38. Bottari-Ticozzi, Raccolta, 1822-25, VI, 241. cited in the preceding footnote. 39. G. N. D’Azzara, Opere di Antonio Raf- 48. See, for example, the relevant passages in:

faello Mengs, Parma, 1780, 116 (Milan, M. L. Gengaro, Orientamenti della critica 1826 ed., I, 193ff.); cited by Barocchi, in d’arte nel Rinascimento, Milan-Messina,

Vasari, La vita di Michelangelo, 1962, III, 1941, pt. 11, sec. 2 (“A Venezia nel Cingue-

1279. The passage in question occurs in cento”’); R. Palluchini, La critica d’arte a the section entitled “Dello stile grande, Venezia nel Cinquecento, Venice, 1943, mediocre e piccolo,” and it represents one and La Giovinezza di Tintoretto, Milan,

of D’ Azzara’s own observations. 1950, iff. (both of these discussions are

essentially reiterations of wh , -

40. Lettere descrittive, ed. B. Gamba, Venice, letti had said in “La. crisi nae ection

1813. nella pittura veneziana,” Convivium, 13,

41. Lettere pittoriche, Rome, 1754-83, II, 163, 1941, Looff.); E. Battisti, “Il concetto d’imi165; V, 108; VI, 328f. (cited by Cicogna, tazione nel Cinquecento,” Commentari, 7, 180); Bottari-Ticozzi, Raccolta, Ill, 377ff.; 1956, 2401. Cf. also the pages of commen-

V, 166ff, tary in P. Barocchi’s edition of the Dia-

. logue (Trattati d’arte del Cinquecento, L

42. See especially pp. 118, 144, 306. 1960, 371ff., 433ff.).

APPENDIX B On artistic relations between Venice and Central Italy, 1500-1557

The purpose of this Appendix is to sketch out, by way of a supplement to the last pages of my Introduction, the pattern of exchanges between Venice and Central Italy briefly referred to there. In 1500 Leonardo da Vinci, whose work serves as a direct bridge be-

tween Quattrocento and Cinquecento painting, paid a visit to Venice. So it is fully appropriate to begin as far back as the turn of the century and proceed from there to the year of the Dialogue’s appearance. Taken in this way, the topic in question is an extremely rich one. It covers travels, meetings between artists and works of art present in Venice or visible in nearby centers. It also covers the results of these contacts and exposures in the artists’ own work. All that is possible here is to bring together the relevant details in a summary and skeletal form. This can best be done by gathering the evidence under four different headings. First, there are the visits and migrations which are documented or directly attested.+ Leonardo’s stay in Venice, which took place early in 1500, may have been of a month’s duration, and Fra Bartolommeo similarly came there for some three months in 1508, in order to execute a specific commission. In 1509 Lotto is recorded as at work upstairs in the Vatican stanze in Rome, and in the spring of 1511 Sebastiano del Piombo moved from Venice to Rome on a permanent basis; he was, however, back in Venice on a return visit in 1528. In 1530 Rosso came to Venice, where he stayed with Aretino, and Parmigianino was also briefly there that same year, having come over from Bologna to acquire marbles and colors. In 1540 Giovanni da Udine worked on a room decoration in Venice, and in 1539-1540 Francesco Salviati carried out a number of commissions there. These commissions included a portrait of Aretino and fresco decorations in the Palazzo Grimani. Salviati’s pupil Giuseppe Porta is also known to have been in Venice in 1540. In 1541-1542 came the visit of Vasari to Venice which was described in my

Introduction. It should be added that he had sent a Nativity to Aretino beforehand. Then in 1545 came Titian’s famous journey to Rome to work for the Farnese family. It was by no means the first time that such a visit had been thought of. Rather the opposite, for there had been the 1513 plan to get Titian to Rome; Duke Alfonso’s proposal in the early 1520’s that he take Titian there with him; Aretino’s suggestion in 1539 that Titian be invited to Rome to do Farnese portraits; and the idea of 1543 that he should join the Farneses on their progress from Rome. Vasari had equally, in 1536, shown himself eager that Titian should come to Florence. Another case of migration, in the reverse

76 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

direction from Sebastiano’s, is the return of Battista Franco to Venice, his birthplace, in the early 1550’s. Finally, there is the already mentioned competition of the mid-1550’s for the decoration of the ceiling in the Libreria Sansoviniana, which involved central Italian artists as well as Venetian ones. Relevant also, in a more peripheral way, are the Roman experiences of the two Dossi and the career of Santo Zago; the relations with Central Italy of the Brescian school; the presence of Jacopo Sansovino in Venice after 1527; and Cellini’s three Venetian visits of 1535, 1537 and 1545. The second body of evidence is a matter of the presence of particular works of art in places where the Venetian painters could see them to their profit. Again there is valuable documentation on this subject.” It is important, for example, that these painters could build up a knowledge of the antique by consulting examples which lay close at

hand. Dolce goes so far as to deny, at one point in his text, that Titian had had such opportunities during the early part of his career. In fact, however, there were the collections of Jacopo Bellini and the Grimani family in Venice itself; and Titian had early opportunities to study the Bembo collection in Padua and the Mantuan collections, of which he undoubtedly availed himself. Similarly examples of the work of Raphael and

Fra Bartolommeo were to be seen at Ferrara in the second decade of the Cinquecento, and Titian was there in 1516 and 1519. In the third decade private collectors in Venice are recorded as possessing works which were either by or directly after Raphael. Another important medium of communication in this connection were the engravings by Marcantonio Raimondi and Agostino Veneziano which reflected the late style of Raphael. Achieving as they did a very wide circulation, these prints would have been passed around in Venice; and the artist could retain them in his studio for study purposes. In the case of Michelangelo, there is the Cardinal Domenico Grimani’s commission of a quadretto for his collection in 1523. This is documented, and so are Aretino’s repeated efforts, after 1537, to obtain Michelangelo drawings for himself. More tentative points involve the dissemination in Northern Italy of engravings after the Sistine ceiling, which can be assumed without exact record of when it first began, and the split-up of the Bathers cartoon around 1515-1516, which resulted in one section (perhaps the whole right-hand half) passing to Mantua. There were paintings by Correggio in private hands in Mantua; and there was Giulio Romano’s whole body of work there. In these last three cases, then, Titian would undoubtedly have made an admiring inspection in the course of his visits to Mantua, just as Michelangelo is known to have admired a

Appendix B 77 portrait of Titian’s at Ferrara in 1529. Back in Venice once more, the visits of Roman artists described in the last paragraph sometimes led to the subsequent importation of newer examples of their work. Aretino, as an indefatigable collector, was active in bringing this about. In 1541 he requested drawings from Giovanni da Udine, in 1542 and 1545 he was the recipient of a work of Salviati’s, and in 1548 he similarly acquired a portrait by Vasari. Lastly, there is a community of evidence indicating that, by 1557 at the latest and probably from a somewhat earlier date, casts after Michelangelo’s figures for the Medici tombs were to be seen and studied in Venice. The third sort of evidence involves travels and meetings between artists which are likely, but essentially hypothetical, because, without there being any documentation, they are strongly suggested by the works of art themselves.? Thus Lotto’s work gives grounds for believing that, after his above-mentioned stay in Rome, this artist must also have traveled in Tuscany; and the work of Pordenone suggests several visits to Rome on his part between 1515 and 1535. Considerations of a similar kind make it likely that Titian and Parmigianino had enjoyed a meeting at Bologna in 1530, and that Titian paid a visit to Parma in 1543 and took special note on that occasion of the Correggio frescoes there. He may well have visited Parma in 1530 too; and similarly he and Giulio Romano, who are known to have been in contact with one another at Mantua in 1537-1538, may also have met there at other times in the late 1520’s and 1530’s. Again, there is the likelihood that Tintoretto made an expedition to Rome in the early 1550’s. Finally, there is the evidence which derives from stylistic relationships. The links of this kind between Venetian and central Italian art are of paramount importance during the period under survey. They also bring up complex problems of definition and explanation. Here, then, all that is possible is to set out, in the barest of forms, the major subjects of inquiry which would deserve to be discussed in this connection. They would be:* 1. The influence of Leonardo in Venice during the first two decades. After the artist’s 1500 visit, it would seem that ideas and studies of his filtered through from Florence.

2. Giorgione’s indebtedness to the schools of Emilia and Ferrara. His Castelfranco Madonna, in particular, relates back to certain altarpieces by Francia and Costa. It may also owe something to the work of Perugino. 3. The significance of Fra Bartolommeo’s visit of 1508. It is much to the point here

that the works which the Frate painted in the immediate aftermath of this visit show him drawing temporarily on Giovanni Bellini’s art, and possibly Giorgione’s as well.

78 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

4. Venice’s loss and Rome’s gain when, in 1511, Sebastiano moved from one center to the other. In the creation of the Venetian high classicism of 1507-1510, it may well have been Sebastiano rather than Giorgione who had contributed the decisive innovations. Recognition of this should figure centrally in a properly just estimate of the 1511 situation. 5. The great variety of central Italian influences found in the art of Lotto. 6. The universality of knowledge and interest which is apparent in and behind Titian’s pictorial progress. From the early years of the century to 1557 and beyond, almost every successive painting of his provides some evidence on this score. Motifs, structural devices and traits of style are borrowed continuously from non-Venetian sources; and the geographical range of these sources matches the unparalleled breadth of experience which Titian achieved through his travels and his constant attentiveness to what was happening elsewhere. Like his response to the antique, Titian’s response to the art of Raphael and Michelangelo took differing forms at different points in his career. In the case of Raphael, for example, above and beyond Titian’s assimilations of the second and third decades, there is a further point which has not previously been noted. The Presentation relates back to two of Raimondi’s Raphaelesque engravings, Christ Teaching and the Preaching at Athens, in a way which bears on Titian’s whole path of evolution in the 1530’s. To continue further with the listing of central Italian and northern Italian sources, Fra Bartolommeo, Correggio and Giulio Romano all appear to have contributed to Titian’s art. If their influence was less great than that of Michelangelo and Raphael, this is only be-

cause it was limited to a certain period in time, or to a certain body of work. Still another possibility, in the early 1540's, is the influence of Vasari.

What matters most profoundly to the modern historian is the full and deep way in which Titian was able to absorb all these stimuli, and the drive that he had toward doing this. Without such a capacity and such drive, there would not have been the constant parallelism that one finds between Titian’s own art and contemporary central Italian developments.

7. The whole conception of the portrait in the period between 1527 and 1539-1540. There are analogies here between Titian’s portraits on one side, and on the other side those of Pontormo and Vasari, Parmigianino and Giulio Romano. This is particularly true in the mid-1530’s; and the developments in presentation and organization which

Appendix B 79 are in question here represent one special and very important aspect of the parallelism just referred to. 8. The contributions of Salviati and Vasari to Venetian art, and what they in turn gained from their visits to Venice. Rather than offering Venice something new and original essentially of their own creation, these two men seem to have served mainly as the carriers of Michelangelesque and Parmigianesgque influence. They did, however, contribute in an important way to the later development of Venetian ceiling decoration, by virtue of the work of this kind which they did while they were in Venice. The impression that Venetian art made on them seems to have been equally limited in its aftereffects. While they may have yielded to it in certain specific ways in their immediately subsequent paintings, it did not bring about any fundamental change of direction. 9. The influence of Parmigianino upon Schiavone during the latter’s formative years. 1o. The role of central Italian sources in the formation of Jacopo Bassano’s art. 11. The visual evidence of Tintoretto’s dependence upon Michelangelo. 12. Central Italian influences on the work of Veronese before 1557. 13. The use in Venice in 1556 of a type of illusionistic ceiling decoration which seems to have been invented by Giulio Romano. The scheme of Giulio’s in question was in the Castello at Mantua; its Venetian counterpart was in Santa Maria dell’Orto, and was painted by the Rosa brothers of Brescia. Both works are lost, but can be reconstructed in general terms from literary descriptions. When these four bodies of evidence are put together, three points follow very forcibly. First, there can be little doubt that, between 1500 and 1557, there was absolutely continuous artistic contact between Venice and Central Italy; relations of this kind, indeed, had become firmly established as early as the 1430's. Second, if the state of Venetian painting at any given time between 1500 and 1560 is to be properly evaluated, the contemporary central Italian situation must necessarily play a key part in the reckoning. Last, the period around 1540, which brought Dolce close to Aretino, was marked by particularly firm and close ties between the two milieus. These three points have an important bearing on the contextual background to the Dialogue.

NOTES TO APPENDIX B

1. The information gathered in the rest of 2. The details enumerated in the rest of this this paragraph is published in, or pro- paragraph are found in the following pub-

vided by, the following sources: lications or sources:

Leonardo, Fra Bartolommeo: Documenti For the study of the antique in Venice e memorie riguardanti la vita e le opere and the collections available, see C, 53.

di Leonardo da Vinci, ed. L. Beltrami, Works by Raphael and Fra Bartolom-

Milan, 1919, No. 103; P. Vincenzo Mar- meo at Ferrara: Golzio, 53-55, 62f., 74f.; chese, Memorie dei piu insigni pittori, H. von der Gabelentz, Fra Bartolommeo, scultori e architetti dominicani, Bologna, Leipzig, 1922, I, 121, and B. Berenson,

1879, II, 601f., doc. v. Drawings of the Florentine Painters, ChiLotto, Sebastiano: A. Venturi, Storia cago, 1938 ed., I, 159; Hl, No. 302. For dell’arte italiana, IX, 4, p. 2; Milanesi, V, Titian’s visits to Ferrara, see Venturi, 566 and L. Dussler, Sebastiano del Pi- IX, 3, pp. 103ff. ombo, Basel, 1942, p. 201, doc. 1, p. 208, Works by or after Raphael in Venice:

docs. 66-68. Anonimo Morelliano, Notizie d’Opere del

Rosso: Milanesi, V, 167. For Parmigi- Disegno, ed. T. Frimmel, Vienna, 1888, anino’s Venetian visit, see above, p. 59, pp. 96, 98, 104, 108.

n.Giovanni 254.da Michelangelo and the Cardinal GriUdine, Salviati: Milanesi, mani: Michelangelo, Lettere, ed. G. MilaVI, 562, 568; Camesasca, Ixxxiii, Bottari- nesi, Florence, 1875, 420, and K. Frey, Die Ticozzi, Raccolta, V, 222, 223f., and Mila- Dichtungen des Michelangiolo Buonar-

nesi, VII, 19f. Porta’s presence in Venice roti, Berlin, 1897, p. 506, doc. 21. For is known from the fact that he is named Aretino’s interest in Michelangelo drawas the artist of the frontispiece to Le sorti ings, see p. 28 above; also Camesasca, x, di Francesco Marcolini da Forli, published and Milanesi, VIII, 266f.

by Marcolini in October 1540. For Vasari’s For works of Correggio’s in Mantua,

visit, see p. 45 above. see p. 44 above; for Titian’s visits to ManTitian: for the 1545 visit to Rome, see tua, see C, 55; for Michelangelo at FerC, 14, and for the 1513 and 1539 projects, rera, sce TC, 13. C, 55. For the remaining details, see Mila- Aretino as a collector: Camesasca, cxxv, nesi, VIII, 266f. and J. W. Gaye, Carteggio cliv, cexlvii, and Vasari, Il libro delle inedito d’artisti . .., Florence, 1839-40, ricordanze, ed. A. del Vita, Rome, 1938,

IL, 312f. 63. For Aretino and Salviati, see also C, For Battista Franco’s return to Venice 18.

and the Libreria competition, see C, 56. Casts after Michelangelo in Venice: RiFor the Dossi, see C, 5; for Santo Zago, dolfi is the prime source here (Von Had-

see C, 48. eln, II, 6). See also Milanesi, VIL 63; R.

Notes to Appendix B 81 Borghini, Il Riposo, Florence, 1584, 551; visual evidence, see J. Wilde, “Die ProbM. Boschini, La carta del navegar pitto- leme um Domenico Mancini,” Jahrbuch

resco, Venice, 1660, 140f. der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, 8, 1933, 114.

3. The points set out in the rest of this para- (4) I draw here on observations of Prof. graph are suggested and discussed in the Freedberg’s (made in his 1957 seminar at Forowing. paces mn me modem piterature: Harvard) and also on Mrs. Barbara Debs’ otto, Fordenone: L. Co ett, Lotto, ber- work on Sebastiano for her Harvard Ph.D.

gamo, 1953, 24f.; G. Fiocco, Giovanni thesis

anton’ Pordenone, Le Tre Venezie, 1943, (5) Coletti, Lotto, 25, 32; O. Benesch, “A

3 aa o S. J. Freedb P ae Late Work by Lorenzo Lotto,” Studies

Cc Did (M Teeaer By 3 WW Guide. in the History of Art Dedicated to WilCam briese ( ass.), 1950, 207 NN. OUICA, liam E. Suida (London), Phaidon Press, Correggio e Tiziano,” in Manifestaziont 1 510 ff

nel IV Centenario della Morte del Cor9991Tizians 240K. os Stil, a _ ay ooae (6) T. Hetzer, “Studien tiber reggio, Parma, 1936, 111ff., and E. ;Ti-; , 7, ]KunstW, 1, 1923, 202ff.; W. A. Suida, Popham, Correggio Drawings, London, . ; ma — zian, Zurich-Leipzig, 1933, 14f.; R. W.

1957, 38; F. Hartt, Giulio Romano, New . a

Kennedy, review of A. M. Hind’s Early Haven,Fees i959, I,. 4s 160ff., 176ff., andAB, J. 33, oy ; Italian Engraving, 1951, 146, and Shearman, “Titian’s Portrait of Giulio hires S ra Romano,” yD... Tiziano in107, Roma,” in Ildel Mondo Antico BurlM, 1965, 172f£f. ; . oy ca , nel Rinascimento, Atti V. Convegno Tintoretto: S. Levie,di“Daniele Vol- ; ; i" Internazionale Studi del da Rinascimento

168Ff. Oy . .

terra e Tintoretto,” AVeneta,1958, 7, 1953, . ; (Florence, 1956), Florence, 237ff.; O. Brendel, “Borrowings from Ancient

4. It is hard to compile a bibliography for Art in Titian,” AB, 37, 1955, 113ff.; J.

this final section of the survey, since some Walker, Bellini and Titian at Ferrara, Lon-

of the issues have not yet received the don, 1956, 41. See also Popham, loc.cit.; examination in depth which they deserve. Shearman, op.cit., 174. There is a strikI shall therefore limit myself to citing, ing parallel, emphasized by Prof. Wilde subject by subject, those treatments which in lectures, between Titian’s Ancona Cruare the most helpful or the most sugges- cifixion (ca. 1560; Tietze, pl. 236) and Mi-

tive in their argument: chelangelo’s late Crucifixion drawings.

(1) K. Clark, Leonardo da Vinci, Oxford, (7) Very suggestive and illuminating here

1940, 106. are certain comments of C. H. Smyth’s in (2) R. Longhi, Viatico, Florence, 1946, 10ff. the final chapter of his unpublished thesis,

However, the specific works of Fran- “Bronzino Studies” (Princeton, 1955).

cia and Costa which Longhi brought in Smyth characterizes the period between the for comparison here are by no means the Sack of Rome and the close of the fourth most appropriate ones. Works of theirs decade as being, artistically, “a period of dating from 1499-1501 support the argu- relative moderation, objectivity, monumen-

ment much more convincingly. tality, clarity and simplicity, reserve, so(3) Cf. S. J. Freedberg, “Fra Bartolom- briety, and one might say high-mindedmeo,” in Encyclopedia of World Art, New ness” (p. 256). The examples which he York, II, 1960, 382f. Freedberg offers here chooses from the field of portraiture to the summary judgment that the Frate, on support this contention include Titian’s

this visit of his, took rather than gave. chief portraits of the 1530’s, Giulio RoFor an alternative interpretation of the mano’s Isabella d’Este at Hampton Court,

82. Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Parmigianino’s Antea, Pontormo’s Duke (9) L. Fréhlich-Bum, “Andrea Meldolla Alessandro at Philadelphia and Vasari’s gennant Schiavone,” Jahrbuch der kunstDuke Alessandro in the Palazzo Riccardi. historischen Sammlungen der allerhochSmyth also points up, as Freedberg had sten Kaiserhauses, 31, 1913, 137f£f.

done before him, how the aesthetic and (10) Here I am indebted to W. R. Rearsocial ideas underlying this kind of image ick’s work on Bassano for his Harvard can be connected with the concept of de- Ph.D. thesis. corum set out in Castiglione’s Cortegiano, (11) J. Wilde, “Die Mostra del Tinto-

which had first appeared in 1528. retto zu Venedig,” ZfK, 7, 1938, 144;

(8) I. H. Cheney, “Francesco Salviati’s D. Coffin, “Tintoretto and the Medici

North Italian Journey,” AB, 45, 1963, Tombs,” AB, 33, 1951, 110ff. 337ff. See also (to correct a misleading (12) M. Levey, “An Early Dated Veronese citation of Cheney’s) G. M. Jaderosa, “La and Veronese’s Early Work,” BurlM, 102, Deposizione di Cristo del Corpus Domini 1960, 197ff. di Francesco Salviati ritrovata,”” AVeneta, (13) J. Schulz, “A Forgotten Chapter in the

16, 1962, 154f.; M. Hirst, “Three Ceiling Early History of Quadratura Painting: Decorations by Francesco Salviati,” ZfK, The Fratelli Rosa,” ibid., 103, 1961, 9off.

26, 1963, 146ff. A number of additional topics pertainJ. Schulz, “Vasari at Venice,” BurlM, ing to the period after 1540 are covered

103, 1961, 500ff. See also now P. Barocchi, by R. Palluchini, La giovinezza di Tinto-

Vasari pittore, Milan, 1964, 21ff. retto, Milan, 1950, pt. 1.

Si SE BE) ae 24 DIALOGOME

i} ar ae hs 0. F a Lana ‘ AS pet 4

M. LODOVICO DOLCE, INTITOLATO LARETINO.

Nel quale fi ragiona della dignita di effa Pittura, e di tutte le parti neceflarie, chea perfetto Pitrore fi acconuengono;:

CON ESEMPI DI PITTORI ANTICHI, & moderni: enel fine fi fa mentione delle virrn

e delle opere del Diuin. TirTriawNo.

CON PRIVILEGIO.

4 Se i’ 23 . -

» te 6 Bee) *) “BE \V\

PNG

IN VINEGIA APPRESSO GABRIER GIOLITO DE FERRARI,

M D LYII.

a DIALOGO DELLA PITTURA di M. LODOVICO DOLCE

ONE

Pietro Aretino Giovan Francesco Fabrini [Aret.] Hoggi fanno a punto quindici giorni, Fabrini mio, che ritrovandomi nella bellissima

Chiesa di San Giovanni e Paolo; nella quale m’era ridotto insieme col dottissimo Giulio Camillo per la solennita di San Pietro Martire, che si celebra ogni giorno allo altare, ove é posta quella gran tavola della Historia di cotal Santo, rappresentata divinamente in Pittura dalla delicatissima mano del mio illustre Signor Compare Titiano: parvemi di

vedervi tutto intento a riguardar quell’altra tavola di San Thomaso d’Aquino, che in

compagnia di altri Santi fu dipinta a guazzo molti anno sono, da Giovanni Bellino, Pittor Vinitiano. E senon, che ambedue fummo sviati da M. Antonio Anselmi, che ci meno a casa di Monsignore il Bembo, vi facevamo alhora un’improviso assalto, per tenervi tutto quel giorno prigione con esso noi. Hora sovenendomi di havervi veduto tutto astratto in quella contemplatione, vi dico, che la tavola del Bellino non é indegna di laude: percioche ogni figura sta bene, e vi sono di belle teste: e cosi le carni, e non meno i panni non si discostano molto dal naturale. Da che si puo comprendere agevolmente, che il Bellino (per quanto comportava quella eta) fu Maestro buono e diligente. Ma egli e stato dipoi vinto da Giorgio da Castel franco; e Giorgio lasciato a dietro infinite miglia da Titiano: ilquale diede alle sue figure una Heroica Maesta, e trovo una maniera di colorito morbidissima, e nelle tinte cotanto simile al vero, che si puo ben dire con verita, ch’ella va di pari con la Natura. Fab. Signor Pietro non é mio costume di biasimare alcuno. Ma voglio ben dirvi sicuramente

questo, che chi ha veduto una sola volta le Pitture del Divino Michel’Agnolo, non si dovrebbe invero piu curar (per cosi dire) di aprir gliocchi per vedere opera di qual si voglia Pittore.

Aret. Voi dite troppo: e fate ingiuria a molti Pittori illustri: come a Rafaello da Urbino, ad

Antonio da Correggio, a Francesco Parmigiano, a Giulio Romano, a Polidoro, e molto piu

al nostro Titiano Vecellio: iquali tutti con la stupenda opera delle loro Pitture hanno

adornato Roma, e quasi tutta Italia, e dato un lume tale

THE DIALOGUE ON PAINTING OF M. LODOVICO DOLCE ONE

Pietro Aretino Giovan Francesco Fabrini Aret. Just two weeks ago, my dear Fabrini, I happened to be in the beautiful church of Santi Giovanni e Paolo. I had gone there in company with the learned Giulio Camillo for the mass of St. Peter the Martyr. It is celebrated daily at the altar which has over it that large canvas telling the saint’s story: a divine depiction, painted by the delicate hand of my distinguished friend Titian. So I saw then what appeared to be you looking all intently at that other painting—the one of St. Thomas Aquinas which the Venetian artist Giovanni Bellini carried out in tempera many years back, along with other figures of saints. And had it not been that both of us were diverted by Messer Antonio Anselmi, who took us to the house of Monsignore Bembo, we would then and there have made a surprise descent upon you, with the intention of holding you prisoner with us for the whole of that day. And now, remembering how I saw you completely absorbed in that contemplation of yours, I put it to you that the painting by Bellini is not unpraiseworthy. For every figure in it stands up well, and there are some fine heads; the flesh areas too, and the draperies equally, are at no great remove from the life. On this basis one can easily comprehend that Bellini was (insofar as his period allowed) a good and careful master. But he was then outdone by Giorgione of Castelfranco. And Giorgione has himself been a thousand leagues outdistanced by Titian, who imparted a heroic majesty to his figures and devised a system of coloring so very soft, and so close to reality in its tones, that one can well and truly say that it goes in step with nature. Fab, Sir, it is no habit of mine to take people to task. But I do want to give you my considered opinion that the man who has seen once only the pictures of the divine Michelangelo should not—in a manner of speaking—really trouble any more with opening his eyes to look at the work of any other painter whatever. Aret. You overdo your point, and do injustice to many painters of distinction: for example, Raphael of Urbino, Antonio da Correggio, Francesco Parmigiano, Giulio Romano, Polidoro and even more our own Titian. All of these have adorned Rome, and indeed almost the whole of Italy, with pictures which are stupendous achievements, and have so lighted

86 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWO

alla Pittura, che forse per molti secoli non si trovera chi giunga a questo segno. Taccio di Andrea del Sarto, di Perino del Vaga, e del Pordonone; che pure sono stati tutti Pittori eccellenti, e degni, che le loro opere siano e vedute a lodate da giudiciosi. Fab. Sicome Home[ro] é primo fra Poeti Greci, Virg[ilio] fra Latini, e Dante fra Thoscani: cosi Michel’Agnolo fra Pittori e Scultori della nostra eta.

Aret. Non vi niego, che Michel’Agnolo a nostri di non sia un raro miracolo dell’arte e della Natura. E quelli, che non ammirano le cose sue, non hanno punto di giudicio: e massimamente d’intorno alla parte del disegno, nella quale senza dubbio é profondissimo. Perci-

oche egli é stato il primo, che in questo secolo ha dimostro a Pittori i bei dintorni, gli scorti, il rilevo, le moventie, e tutto quello, che si ricerca in fare un nudo a perfettione: cosa, che non si era veduta inanzi a lui: lasciando perd da parte gli Apelli, & i Zeusi: iquali non meno per testimonio de’ Poeti e Scrittori antichi, che per quello, che di leggeri si puo conoscere dalla eccellenza di quelle poche statue, che ci sono state lasciate dalle ingiurie del tempo, e delle nationi nimiche, possiamo giudicar, che fossero mirabilissimi. Ma per questo non dobbiamo fermarci nelle laudi d’un solo: havendo hoggidi la liberalita de’ cieli prodotti Pittori eguali, & anco in qualche parte maggiori di Michel’Agnolo: come furono senza fallo alcuni de i sopradetti: e, come ce n’é hoggidi uno, che basta per tutti. Fab. Voi, Signor Pietro (perdonatemi) v’ingannate, se havete questa openione. Perche la eccellenza di Michel’Agnolo e tanta, che si puo senza avanzare il vero, pareggiarla degnamente alla luce del Sole: laquale di gran lunga vince & offusca ogni altro lume. Aret. Le vostre sono parole Poetiche, e tali, quali suol trar di bocca altrui l’affettione; Che spesso occhio ben san fa veder torto.

Ma non é maraviglia, che essendo voi Fiorentino, l’amor, che portate a vostri, vi faccia talmente cieco, che riputiate oro solamente le cose di Michel’Agnolo, e le altre vi paiano piombo vile. Ilche, quando non fosse, vi raccordereste, che la eta di Alessandro Magno inalzava insino al cielo Apelle: ne pero rimaneva di lodare e di celebrar Zeusi, Prothogene, Thimante, Polignoto, & altri eccellenti Pittori. Cosi fu sempre tra Latini nella Poesia tenuto Virgilio Divino: ma non si sprezzO giamai, ne si lascio di leggere Ovidio, Horatio, Lucano,

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 87 TWO

the way for painting that perhaps for many centuries to come not one person will be found to match this standard. Nor do I mention Andrea del Sarto, Perino del Vaga and Pordenone—all of whom, none the less, have been excellent artists, and have rated the distinction of having their works looked at and praised by men of judgment.

Fab. Just as Homer takes first place among the Greek poets, Virgil among the Latins, and Dante among the Tuscans, so does Michelangelo among the painters and sculptors of our age.

Aret. I do not deny to you that Michelangelo represents, in our day, a rare miracle of art and nature; and those who do not admire his work possess not a shred of judgment. This applies most of all to the field of draftsmanship, in which he is, without a doubt, most profound. For he has been the first artist of this century to provide painters with examples of beautiful outlines, foreshortenings, projection, movement, and indeed all that one can ask for in the execution of a nude to perfection. And for this there was no earlier precedent—if we leave aside men such as Apelles and Zeuxis: these, on the evidence of the ancient poets and historians, and equally on the basis of what little we can grasp from the excellence of those few statues that the depredations of time and those of warring nations have left us, we may judge to have been quite wonderful. But we must not, on these grounds, confine ourselves to the praise of one man alone. For today the bounty of heaven has produced painters who are Michelangelo’s equals, and even in some respect his superiors. Some of those I mentioned earlier were unmistakably in this class; and today there is one man who can stand in for them all. Fab. Forgive me, sir, but if this is your opinion, you are deceiving yourself. For Michelangelo’s

excellence is so great that, without going beyond the truth, one may suitably compare it to the light of the sun, which far surpasses and dims all other lights. Aret. Your words have a poetic flavor, and are of the kind that affection commonly brings to the lips of others, “that great misguider of the soundest eye.” Yet it is not surprising that—as a man of Florence yourself—you should love your countrymen to such a point of blindness that you consider only the works of Michelangelo as gold, and regard the remainder as cheap lead. Were this not so, you would recall that the age of Alexander the Great exalted Apelles to the skies; yet it was still possible for Zeuxis, Protogenes, Timanthes, Polygnotus and other excellent painters to be praised and honored then. Similarly amongst the Latin peoples Virgil, in the case of poetry, was always regarded as divine; but this never meant that they despised, or ceased to read, Ovid, Horace,

a 88 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

THREE

Statio, & al[t]ri Poeti. Iquali, se bene si veggono dissimili l’uno dall’altro, tutti nel suo genere, 0 diciamo maniera, sono perfetti. E, perche Dante sia pieno di tanta dottrina; chi é colui, che non prezzi sommamente il leggiadrissimo Petrarca? Anzi a lui la maggior parte lo pone inanzi? E, se Homero fra Poeti Greci fu solo; e, perche altri non iscrissero in quella lingua soggetti di arme: senon dipoi un Quinto Calabro, che lo seguito, e non gli andé molto appresso: overo Apollonio, che scrisse l’Argonautica. Ma sono alcuni al mio giudicio poco intendenti: iguali indrizzando tutte le cose ad una sola forma, biasimano chiunque da lei si discosta. Di qui, come ho udito dire, Horatio si fa beffe d’un certo sciocco; ilquale era di tanto delicato gusto, che mai non cantava, ne recitava altri versi, fuor che quelli di Catullo e di Calvo. Ilquale Horatio se vivesse hoggidi, si riderebbe

di voi molto piu, ascoltando le vostre parole: poi, che volete, che gli huomini si cavino gliocchi, per non vedere altre Pitture, che quelle di Michel’Agnolo, havendo, come ho detto, il Cielo prodotto alla nostra eta Pittori eguali, & anco a lui superiori. Fab. E dove troverete voi un’altro Michel’Agnolo; non che maggiore? Aret. E costume da fanciullo tornare a replicar molte volte una cosa. Pure vi diro da capo, che

sono stati a nostri di alcuni Pittori eguali, et etiandio in qualche parte maggiori a Mi-

chel’Agnolo: & hora ci é Titiano, ilquale, come ho accennato, basta per quanti ci furono. Fab. Et io tornerd sempre a dirvi, che Michel’Agnolo é solo. Aret. Non vorrei venir su’l paragone per fuggir le comparationi: lequali sono sempre odiose. Fab. Stimo, che fra noi si possa ragionar liberamente: e mi sia grato, che habbiate a scegliere uno di questi vostri illustri Pittori, e confrontarlo con Michel’Agnolo. che forse averra, che io, udite le nostre ragioni, mutero parere.

Aret. E difficile a sveller dell’animo altrui una openione, che piantata dalla aftettione, per qualche tempo v’habbia fermate le sue radici. Pure io faro quello, che potré: si, perche la verita non si dee tacere: si, per isvilupparvi dall’errore, nel quale sete involto. Fab. Ve ne sapro grado: e confessero di haver da voi ricevuto un beneficio molto grande.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 89 THREE

Lucan, Statius and other poets, each of whom, though obviously quite different from all of the others, is still perfect in his own genre—let us call it his “mode.” Is there a man who, just because Dante’s writings are full of so much learning, denies his highest esteem to the great delicacy of Petrarch? Indeed, the majority of people even prefer the latter, And if Homer stood on his own among Greek poets, this is because no one else wrote on martial subjects in the same language, apart from one Quintus Calaber, a subsequent follower of Homer who did not come anywhere close to him, and Apollonius, the author of the Argonautica. There are in my view certain people of small understanding, who pilot everything towards a single variety of form, and then stricture whoever

departs from it. I have heard it said, in this connection, that Horace makes fun of a certain fool whose taste was so delicate that he never sang or recited any other verses than those of Catullus and Calvus; and were this same Horace alive today and listening to your words, he would laugh at you even more—since you want men to put their eyes out, so as to avoid seeing paintings other than those of Michelangelo, and this in an age when, as I said before, heaven has produced painters of equal stature, and even some that outclass him. Fab. And where will you find a second Michelangelo—not to speak of a superior?

Aret. It is a child’s habit to go on repeating the same thing over and over again. Nevertheless, I will tell you once more that there have been several painters in our time who compare with Michelangelo, and even in some respects surpass him; and now there is Titian, who, as I have hinted, suffices for as many predecessors as there may be. Fab. And I shall always keep on telling you that Michelangelo stands alone. Aret. IJ have no desire to match artist with artist; better to avoid comparisons, which are invariably odious.

Fab. I count on the possibility of free argument between the two of us. So I would be glad if you would pick out one of these illustrious artists of yours, and set him up against Michelangelo. It may be that, after hearing our arguments, I will alter my opinion. Aret, Itis difficult to eradicate from someone else’s mind a view which affection has implanted,

and which has had some time in which to settle its roots there. Nevertheless, I will do what I can—first, because truth must out; and second, in order to rescue you from the erroneous thinking in which you have become caught up.

Fab, I shall be most grateful to you, and shall acknowledge that you have done me a very great service.

a 90 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

FOUR

Aret. E che direte, se io comincieré da Rafaello? Fab. Che Rafaello é stato gran Pittore, ma non eguale a Michel’Agnolo. Aret. II vostro é giudicio particolare: e non dovreste voi giudicar cosi risolutamente. Fab. Anzié giudicio comune. Aret. Forse di que’, che non sanno: iquali senza intendere altro, corrono dietro il parer d’altrui,

come fa una pecora dietro l’altra: over dialcuni pittorucci, che sono Scimie di Michel’Agnolo.

Fab. Anzi de’ periti dell’arte, e di molti dotti. Aret. So bene io, che in Roma, mentre che Rafaello viveva, la maggior parte, si de’ Letterati, come de’ periti dell’arte, lo anteponevano nella Pittura a Michel’Agnolo. E quelli, che inchinavano a Michel’Agnolo, erano per lo piu Scultori: iquali si fermavano solamente su’l disegno e su la terribilita delle sue figure, parendo loro, che la maniera leggiadra e gentile di Rafaello, fosse troppo facile, e per conseguente non di tanto artificio: non sapendo, che la facilita é il principale argomento delle eccellenza di qualunche arte, e la piu difficile a conseguire: & e arte a nasconder I’arte: e che finalmente oltre al disegno, al Pittore richieggono altre parti, tutte necessarissime. Ma hoggidi, se noi vogliamo porre nel numero di questi periti dell’arte alcuni Pittori di gran nome, gli troveremo pure in favor di Rafaello: e se fra la moltitudine intenderemo quelli, che sono lontani dal Volgo, gli trovaremo similmente in suo favore. Poi, se la moltitudine corre a veder l’opere dell’uno e dell’altro: non é dubbio, che tutti non esclamino per Rafaello. E gia i fautori di Michel’Agnolo affermano, che Rafaello non seppe mai far cosa, che non piacesse sommamente. Ma lasciamo da parte le autorita, e fermiamoci sopra qualche sodo fondamento di ragione.

Fab. Io v’ascolto volentieri, come huomo intendentissimo, e parimente guidiciosissimo di gualunque cosa: e massimamente di Pittura.

Aret. Voi dovete ben sapere, che Rafaello vivendo mi fu carissimo amico, & altresi é hora amico mio Michel’Agnolo. Ilquale, quanta sia la stima, che faccia del mio giudicio, ne fa fede quella sua lettera in risposta d’una mia sopra la historia della sua ultima Pittura. E, quanta ancora ne facesse Rafaello, ne sarebbe testimonio Agostino Ghigi, se egli vivesse: essendo che Rafaello mi soleva dimostrar quasi sempre ogni sua pittura, prima

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 91 FOUR

Aret. And what will you say if I begin with the name of Raphael? Fab. That Raphael was indeed a great painter, but not on a par with Michelangelo. Aret. Your view is a personal one, and you should not pronounce judgment so rigidly. Fab. Yet it is a commonly held opinion. Aret. An opinion of the ignorant, perhaps—the kind of people who, with no further understanding, run along behind the opinions of others, like one sheep following another; or of certain daubers, who are apers of Michelangelo. Fab. Yet men well versed in art and many men of learning think the same. Aret. Iam well aware that in Rome, while Raphael was still alive, the majority of lettered men on the one hand, and connoisseurs of art on the other, put him before Michelangelo as a painter; and those who inclined towards the latter were for the most part sculptors, who rested their claim solely on Michelangelo’s draftsmanship and the overpowering grandeur of his figures—their opinion being that Raphael’s delicate and restrained style showed too much ease, and consequently did not have as much contrivance to it. They were unaware that, whatever the art, the quality of ease is the main criterion of excellence, and also the hardest to attain. Art is the hiding of art’s presence, and lastly the painter needs proficiency in other respects besides draftsmanship, all of them quite indispensable. Today, however, were we prepared to count amongst these connoisseurs of art

certain painters of great repute, we would find them favoring Raphael. Amongst the general public too, if we were to listen to those who are far from the common crowd, we would find them similarly on his side. Again, even if the masses hurry to see the

works of both one and the other, there can be no doubt that all raise their voices in favor of Raphael. And the partisans of Michelangelo themselves affirm that Raphael never did anything which was not extremely pleasing. But let us set aside the matter of authorities and concentrate on some solid basis of inquiry.

Fab. I am your willing listener; for you are to me a man of outstanding intelligence and judgment in matters of all kinds, and most especially in the field of painting. Aret. You must be well aware that Raphael in his lifetime was a very dear friend of mine, and that I now have a similar friendship with Michelangelo. The degree to which Michelangelo values my powers of judgment is evidenced by that reply of his to a letter of mine about the subject matter of his latest painting. And Raphael’s regard for me was even more considerable, as Agostino Chigi would bear out, supposing he were still alive. For the fact is that Raphael would almost invariably show me each painting of his before

92 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FIVE

ch’egli la publicasse: & io fui buona cagione d’indurlo a dipinger le volte del suo palagio. Ma tutto che ambedue mi siano stati amici, e l’uno serbi, ancor vivendo, viva l’amicitia meco; m’e piu amica la verita. Sodisfard adunque al vostro disiderio in cosa non necessaria: perche io mi credo, che questa disuguaglianza in favor di Rafaello appresso gl’intendenti sia gia decisa: ma utile in questo; che prima mi converra fare un poco di discorso d’intorno all’importanza della pittura. Dird adunque primieramente quello, ch’é Pittura, e l’ufficio del Pittore: e poi discorrendo per tutte le sue parti, nel fine verrd al paragone di costor due: et ancora vi ragionero di alcuni altri: e principalmente di Titiano. Fab. So che molti hanno scritto honoratissimamente di Rafaello: come il Bembo, che lo mette uguale a Michel’Agnolo: e scrisse cio a tempo, che Rafaello era giovanetto: il Castiglione, che gli da il primo luoco: e Polidoro Virgilio, che lo aguaglia ad Apelle: & il simile fa il vostro Vasari Aretino nelle vite de’ Pittori. So d’altra parte, che l’Ariosto nel principio del trentesimo terzo canto del suo Furioso distingue in tal guisa Michel’Agnolo da gli altri Pittori, che lo fa Divino. Ma io non voglio rapportarmi, come dite, ad autorita di alcuno, per gran letterato, che sia, ma solo alla ragione. Che, se io volessi accostarmi al parer di altrui, senza dubbio doverei anteporre il vostro a quello di ciascun’altro. Aret. Voi di troppo mi honorate. E vi dico, che l’Ariosto in tutte le parti del suo Poema ha dimostro sempre uno ingegno acutissimo, fuor che in questa: non dico di lodar Michel’A-

gnolo, che e degno d’ogni gran lode: ma di poner fra il numero di quei Pittori illustri, ch’egli nomina, i due Dossi Ferraresi: de’ quali l’uno stette qui a Vinegia alcun tempo per imparare a dipinger con Titiano: e l’altro in Roma con Rafaello: e prefero una maniera in contrario tanto goffa, che sono indegni della penna d’un tanto Poeta. Ma questo errore sarebbe ancora tolerabile: perche si potrebbe dire, che egli dall’amor della patria fosse stato ingannato: se non ne havesse egli fatto un via maggiore in mescolar Bastiano con

Rafaello, e con Titiano: atteso, che ci sono stati di molti Pittori assai piu eccellenti di costui: iguali non sono pero degni da esser paragonati con niuno di questi due. Ma un tal peccadiglio (per usar

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 93 FIVE

he made it public. And my influence was valuable in persuading him to decorate the ceiling of the Chigi palace. But for all that both these men have been friends of mine, and for all that the one still living keeps alive his relationship with me, truth is, to me, still more of a friend. I will therefore satisfy your desire, even though I believe myself that this preponderant favoring of Raphael amongst men of understanding is already clear-cut, and therefore the trouble is unnecessary. It will be of service, however, in obliging me to say a little first about the importance of painting. At the very start, then, I shall define what painting is, and the function of the artist. After that I shall run over each of the component parts of painting, and so arrive finally at the comparison of our two men together. You will also hear from me about a few other artists, and Titian in particular. Fab. Many, I know, have written about Raphael in terms that do him high honor. Bembo, for

instance, puts him on a par with Michelangelo—and Raphael was only a youth at the time when he wrote this. Then there is Castiglione, who gives him pride of place; Polidore Virgil, who ranks him as Apelles’ equal; and your own Vasari of Arezzo, who does the same in his Lives of the Painters. On the other hand, I know too that Ariosto, at the beginning of the twenty-third canto of his Orlando Furioso, sets Michelangelo apart from other painters in such a fashion as to call him “divine.’”” But I do not want to call, in your words, upon the authority of anyone, however great a man of letters he may be; only upon reason. For if I were prepared to attend to another’s opinion, I ought certainly to rank yours above anyone else’s. Aret. You compliment me too much. And I put it to you, that Ariosto has shown a really sharp

intelligence throughout every part of his poem, except for the one in point. I am not speaking of his praise for Michelangelo, who deserves all warmth of commendation, but of his inclusion of the two Dossi of Ferrara in that list of his which gives the names of distinguished painters. For one of this pair stayed for a time here in Venice, so as to learn to paint under Titian, and the other was under Raphael in Rome; and yet they preferred, as against that, so clumsy a style, that they are unworthy of mention by so great a poet. This mistake might yet be tolerable, for one could say that Ariosto had been led astray by love of his homeland, had the poet not exceeded himself along the same lines by juxtaposing Sebastiano with Raphael and Titian—the point being that there have been many painters who well outstrip Sebastiano in excellence, but are still not worthy of comparison with either of these two. However, such a peccadillo (to use a

94 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento SIX

questa voce Spagnuola) non toglie, che l’Ariosto non fosse quel perfetto Poeta, ch’é tenuto dal mondo: percioche si fatte cose non sono di quelle, che appartengono all’ufficio del Poeta. ne voglio peré inferire, che Bastiano non fosse assai buon Pittore: ma aviene

spesso, che una gemma, o altra cosa sola tenendosi, potra bella apparire: e paragonata con altra, perdera riputatione, e non parera piu quella. Poi é noto a ciascuno, che Michel’Agnolo gli faceva i disegni: e chi si veste delle altrui piume, essendone dipoi spogliato, riman simile a quella ridicola cornacchia, ch’é discritta da Horatio. Ricordami, che essendo Bastiano spinto da Michel’Agnolo alla concorrenza di Rafaello, Rafaello mi soleva dire: o quanto egli mi piace, M. Pietro, che Michel’Agnolo aiuti questo mio novello concorrente, facendogli di sua mano i disegni: percioche dalla fama, che le sue Pitture non istiano al paragone delle mie, potra avedersi molto bene Michel’Agnolo, ch’ io non vinco Bastiano (perche poca loda sarebbe a me di vincere uno, che non sa disegnare) ma lui medesimo, che si reputa (e meritamente) la Idea del disegno. Fab. Invero, che Bastiano non giostrava di pari con Rafaello, se bene haveva in mano la lancia

ce di Michel’Agnolo: e questo, perche egli non la sapeva adoperare: e molto meno con

Titiano: ilguale non ha molto, che mi disse, che nel tempo, che Roma fu saccheggiata da soldati di Borbone, havendo alcuni Tedeschi, da quali era stato occupato il palagio del Papa, acceso con poco rispetto il fuoco per uso loro in una delle camere dipinte da Rafaello: avenne, che’l fumo o la mano de gl’istessi guasto alcune teste. E partiti i soldati, e ritornatovi Papa Clemente, dispiacendogli, che cosi belle teste rimanessero guaste, le fece rifare a Bastiano. Trovandosi adungue Titiano in Roma; & andando un giorno per quelle camere in compagnia di Bastiano, fiso col pensiero e con gliocchi in riguardar le Pitture di Rafaello, che da lui non erano stato piu vedute, giunto a quelle parte, dove havea rifatte le teste Bastiano, gli dimando, chi era stato quel presontuoso & ignorante, che ha-

veva imbrattati quei volti, non sapendo pero, che Bastiano gli havesse riformati: ma veggendo solamente la sconcia differenza, che era dall’altre teste a quelle. Ma lasciamo cotali disparita, che elle poco importano: e vegniamo alla Pittura.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 95 SIX

Spanish term here) does not keep Ariosto from having been that perfect poet that the world adjudges him to be; for points of this sort fall outside the business of the poet. Nor do I wish to imply that Sebastiano was not a fairly good painter; it often happens, however, that a precious stone or other comparable object can appear beautiful while it remains on its own, and yet when matched with another will lose esteem and no longer look as it did. Everyone knows, moreover, that Michelangelo did designs for Sebastiano; and the man who garbs himself with the feathers of another is left, when they are subsequently taken off him, looking like that absurd crow which was described by Horace. I recall that when Sebastiano was being pressed by Michelangelo to enter into competition with Raphael, Raphael used to say to me: “Oh, how pleased I am, my dear Pietro, that Michelangelo helps out this new competitor of mine by personally doing designs for him; for in this way the report that his works do not stand up to comparison with mine will make it extremely plain to Michelangelo that it is not Sebastiano that I outclass —it being small credit to me to outclass someone who cannot make a design—but rather him, who (and justifiably) sees in himself the very Essence of draftsmanship.” Fab. It is true that Sebastiano was no match for Raphael, even with the lance of Michelangelo in his hand—the point being that he did not know how to handle this weapon—and far less of a match for Titian. Titian told me not long ago that at the time when Rome was

sacked by the troops of the Duke of Bourbon, certain of the Germans who had taken over the Papal Palace quite unregardingly lit a fire for their convenience in one of the rooms frescoed by Raphael. So it happened that either the smoke or the hands of these soldiers did damage to some of the heads. And when the troops had left and Pope Clement had returned there, he was displeased at the prospect of such fine heads remain-

ing damaged; so he commissioned their restoration by Sebastiano. Now when Titian came to be in Rome, and was passing through these rooms one day in Sebastiano’s com-

pany, he concentrated his thoughts and his eyes on a study of the Raphael frescoes, which he had never seen before; and when he reached the part where Sebastiano had restored the heads, he asked the latter who the presumptuous and ignorant fellow was who had put daubs on these faces—in ignorance, of course, that Sebastiano had reworked them, and seeing only the unbecoming contrast between the other heads and these. Let us, however, leave aside such disparities—since they matter littl——and move on to painting itself.

96 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento SEVEN

Aret. I] medesimo ho udito io ancora da altri. Fab. Diffinitemi adunque prima quello, che propriamente e Pittura. Aret. Farollo, benche é cosa facile, & intesa da tutti. Dico adunque la Pittura, brevemente parlando, non essere altro, che imitatione della Natura: e colui, che piu nelle sue opere le si avicina, € piu perfetto Maestro. Ma, perche questa diffinitione é alquanto ristretta e manchevole, (percioche non distingue il Pittore dal Poeta, essendo che il Poeta si affatica ancora esso intorno alla imitatione) aggiungo, che il Pittore é intento a imitar per via di linee, e di colori (o sia in un piano di tavola, o di muro, o di tela) tutto quello, che si dimostra all’occhio: & il Poeta col mezo delle parole va imitando non solo cio che si dimostra all’occhio, ma che ancora si rappresenta all’intelletto. La onde essi in questo sono differenti, ma simili in tante altre parti, che si possono dir guasi fratelli. Fab. Questa diffinitione é facile e propria: e similmente é propria la similitudine tra il Poeta et il Pittore: havendo alcuni valenti huomini chiamato il Pittore Poeta mutolo, & il Poeta Pittore, che parla. Aret. Puossi ben dire, che quantunque il Pittore non possa dipinger le cose, che soggiacciono al tatto; come sarebbe la freddezza della neve: o al gusto; come la dolcezza del mele: dipinge non di meno i pensieri e gli affetti dell’animo. Fab. Ben dite, Signor Pietro, ma questi per certi atti esteriori si comprendono: e spesso per uno

inarcar di ciglia, o increspar di fronte, o per altri segni appariscono i segreti interni, tal che molte volte non fa bisogno delle fenestre di Socrate. Aret. Cosi é veramente. Onde habbiamo nel Petrarca questo verso. E spesso ne la fronte il cor si legge.

Ma gliocchi sono principalmente le fenestre dell’animo: et in questi puo il Pittore isprimere acconciamente ogni passione: come I’allegrezze, il dolore, l’ire, le teme, le speranze, & i disideri. Ma pur tutto serve all’occhio de’ riguardanti. Fab. Dir6d ancora, che, se bene il Pittore é diffinito Poeta mutolo, e che muta si chiami altresi la Pittura: sembra pure a un cotal modo, che le dipinte figure favellino, gridino, piangano, ridano, e facciano cosi fatti effetti. Aret. Sembra bene; ma pero non favellano, ne fanno que giialtri effetti.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 97 SEVEN

Aret. I have heard this same story from others as well. Fab. Start then by defining for me what exactly painting is.

Aret. I will, even though the answer is easy and understood by everyone. To put it briefly, then, I say that painting is nothing other than the imitation of nature; and the closer to nature a man comes in his works, the more perfect a master he is. This definition is, however, somewhat narrow and defective, in that it fails to distinguish the painter from the poet—the point being that the poet too goes to trouble over imitation. I add, then, that the painter is concerned to imitate, by dint of lines and colors (whether it be on a flat surface of panel, wall or canvas), everything that presents itself to the eye; while the poet, through the medium of words, characteristically imitates not only what presents itself to the eye, but also what presents itself to the intellect. The two arts differ,

therefore, in this respect; but they are similar in so many other respects that one can almost call them brother arts.

Fab. This definition of yours is simple and appropriate; equally, the resemblance you note between the poet and the painter is fitting, in that some men of parts have called the painter a “mute poet,” and the poet a “speaking painter.” Aret. One may properly say that although the painter cannot depict those things which stand subject to touch (like, for example, the coldness of snow), or to taste (like the sweetness of honey), he depicts, nonetheless, the thoughts and feelings of the spirit. Fab. A good point, sir; but these things come across to us by way of certain outward actions —often it will be in the arching of an eyebrow, the creasing of a forehead, or other such indices that the interior secrets become plain; so that in many cases there is no need for the windows of Socrates. Aret. True indeed; and so we find this line in Petrarch: ‘““Oft one may read the heart upon the brow.” But the eyes, in the main, are the windows of the soul; and in these the painter can fittingly express every emotion there is; such as joys, pain, anger, fears, hopes and desires. Everything, however, is servant to the eye of the spectator. Fab. I would like to add that, even though the painter is defined as a “mute poet,” and though painting itself is similarly called “mute,” nevertheless it works in such a way as to make it appear that the painted figures are talking, crying out, weeping, laughing and generally engaging in actions of this kind.

Aret. Such indeed is the appearance; in fact, however, they are not talking or doing any of those other things.

98 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento EIGHT

Fab. In cio si puo ricercare il parer del vostro virtuoso Silvestro, eccellente Musico, e sonatore del Doge: ilquale disegna e dipinge lodevolmente: e ci fa toccar con mano, che le figure dipinte da buoni Maestri parlano, quasi a paragon delle vive. Aret. Questa e certa imaginatione di chi mira, causata da diverse attitudini, che a cio servono, e non effetto o proprieta della Pittura.

Fab. Cosi é. Aret. L’ufficio adunque del Pittore é di rappresentar con l’arte sua qualunque cosa, talmente simile alle diverse opere della natura, ch’ella paia vera. E quel Pittore, a cui questa simili-

tudine manca, non é Pittore: & all’incontro colui tanto piu é migliore e piu eccellente Pittore, quanto maggiormente le sue Pitture s’assomigliano alle cose naturali. La onde, guando io vi havero dimostro, questa perfettione trovarsi molto piu nelle Pitture del Santio, che del Buonaroti, senza fallo ne seguira quello, che io vi ho replicato piu volte. Ne cio faré per diminuir la gloria di Michel’Agnolo, ne per accrescer quella di Rafaello; che a niun de’ due si puo aggiunger ne levare: ma per gradire, come ho detto, a voi, che lo mie chiedete, e per dire la verita: in servigio dellaquale ho spesso indrizzata contra i Prencipi, come sapete, la spada della mia virtu, poco curandomi, che la verita partorisca odio.

Fab. Ad ogni modo non é alcuno, che ci ascolti. Aret. Et io vorrei, che ci fosser molti: perche oltre, c’ho a ragionar di soggeto nobile (che nobile veramente é la Pittura) le cose vere si debbono dire a tutti; quando il fine non e di mordere, ma di giovare: come chi paragonando insieme Platone, & Aristotele, conchiudesse in favore dell’uno o dell’altro, non sarebbe tenuto maledico, quando egli dimostrasse, ambedue essere stati gran Filosofi, ma l’uno all’altro superiore. Et io nel discorrer sopra questi due Pittori spero di toccare alcune bellissime difficulta dell’arte; lequali, ove da voi, o da altri fossero raccolte e scritte, non sarebbono elle senza utile di molti; che, se ben dipingono, poco intendono quello, che sia Pittura: laquale ignoranza é€ cagione, che divengano arroganti e mordaci, stimando, che’l dipinger sia impresa facile e da tutti: ove in contrario é difficilissirna, e da pochi. Giovarebbe anco questo ragionamento peraventura non poco a gli studiosi di lettere per la conformita, che ha il Pittore con lo Scrittore.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 99 EIGHT

Fab. Here one might solicit the opinion of your man of talent Silvestro, that excellent musician who performs for the Doge. For he draws and paints commendably, and gives us a tangible conviction that the figures painted by masters of quality are speaking, almost as though they were alive.

Aret. This idea is plain imagination on the spectator’s part, prompted by different attitudes which serve that end. It is not an effect or a property of painting. Fab. Precisely. Aret. Thus it is the business of the painter to represent with his artistry objects of all sorts, and to render them so similar to nature in all its diversity that they appear real. The painter who fails to produce this resemblance is no painter; and, conversely, the closer a man’s pictures come to the world of nature, the more of a painter he is and the better and more excellent is his profession. Hence, when I have demonstrated to you that one finds this perfection in the paintings of Raphael to a far higher degree than in those of Michelangelo, the point I have made to you several times over will conclusively follow. It will not be my object to lessen Michelangelo’s glory, nor to increase that of Raphael— for no addition or subtraction is possible with either of the two—but to be obliging, as I have said, in response to the request that you made, and to tell the truth, in the service of which, as you well know, I have often unsheathed against princes the sword of my intellect, with little heed to the fact that truthfulness begets hate. Fab. There is no one listening in on us, in any event. Aret. Personally I would like to have many listeners; for above and beyond the fact that I have to treat with a noble subject—painting being truly noble—what is true should be spoken out to all, when one’s aim is not to wound, but to be of service. If a man matching together Plato and Aristotle were to decide in favor of one or the other, he would not be regarded as a calumniator were he to demonstrate that, while both of them were great philosophers, still one outclassed the other. And in discussing our two painters I hope to touch on some of the finest complexities of art. Were these to be collected and written down by you or by others, they would prove not unserviceable to a quantity of people— people who, even if they paint well, have small understanding of what painting is. This ignorance of theirs, indeed, causes them to turn arrogant and hostile, under the impression that painting is an easy undertaking and that everyone can do it—whereas it is, on the contrary, of extreme difficulty, and only for the few. This discourse of mine may also conceivably offer some assistance to those who study literature, owing to the conformity between painter and writer.

a 100 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

NINE

Fab. Io per la domestichezza, Signor Pietro, che tenemo insieme, non havro rispetto di ritirarvi alquanto fuori di strada: cioé dall’ordine da voi proposto: ricercando, che prima non vi sia grave di spendere alquante parole intorno alla dignita della Pittura. Che, se bene io ne ho letto altre volte, non l’ho per cid a memoria: senza, che la viva voce apporta sempre con esso lei non so che di piu. E prima anco vorrei, che mi dichiariste, se uno, che non sia Pittore, é atto a far giudicio di Pittura. E vero, che io trovo l’esempio in voi: che senza mai haver tocco pennello, sete, come ho detto, giudiciosissimo in quest’arte: ma non ci é piu, che un’ Aretino. E disidero d’intender cio per questa cagione: che sono alcuni Pittori, iquali si sogliono ridere, quando odono, alcun letterato ragionar della Pittura. Aret. Costoro debbono esser di quelli, che di Pittore non tengono altro, che il nome: percioche, se havessero favilla di giudicio, saprebbono, gli Scrittori esser Pittori. Che Pittura é la Poesia: Pittura la Historia, e Pittura qualunque componimento de’ dotti. Di qui il nostro Petrarca chiamo Homero Primo Pittor de le memorie antiche.

Ma ecco, che io voglio di queste vostre altre dimande a tutto mio podere, Fabrini contentarvi: massimamente havendo hoggi assai commodo tempo da ragionare: che non ci sara alcuno, che venga a disturbarci, per esser la maggior parte della citta occupata in veder gliapparecchi, che si sono fatti per la venuta della Reina di Polonia, che in cotal giorno dee arrivare. E dico, che nell’huomo nasce generalmente il giudicio dalla pratica e dalla esperienza delle cose. E non essendo alcuna cosa piu famigliare e domestica all’huomo di quello, ch’é I’huomo: ne seguita, che ciascun’huomo sia atto a far giudicio di quello, che egli vede ogni giorno: cioé della bellezza e della bruttezza di qualunque huomo. Percioche non procedendo la bellezza da altro, che da una convenevole proportione, che comunemente ha il corpo humano, e particolarmente tra se ogni membro: & il contrario deri-

vando da sproportione: essendo il giudicio sottoposto all’occhio: chi e colui, che non

conosca il bello dal brutto? Niuno per certo, se non é€ in tutto privo d’occhi e d’intelletto. Onde havendo l’huomo, come ha, questa cognitione intorno alla forma vera, che é questo individuo: cioé l’huomo vivo: perche non la dee haver molto piu intorno alla finta, che e la morta Pittura?

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 101 NINE

Fab. Sir, we are on close enough terms with one another for me to have no qualms about causing you a slight digression from your track—that is, from the sequence of topics which you have proposed. I have in mind that it would be no great imposition for you to devote a few words beforehand to the nobility of painting. For though I have read about this subject on other occasions, for this very reason I do not know it by heart; and anyway some indefinable extra quality always accompanies the spoken word. And even prior to that I would like you to tell me whether a man who is not a painter himself is qualified to judge painting. It is true that I find the answer exemplified in you, who have never laid hands on a paintbrush, and yet, as I previously remarked, show exceptional judgment in this field. There is, however, only one Aretino; and the reason why I ask for enlightenment here is that there are certain painters who are in the habit of mocking when they hear some man of letters holding forth on the subject of painting.

Aret. Such people must belong among those who are painters only in name; for if they had one spark of judgment in them, they would know that writers are painters, that poetry is painting, history is painting, and that any kind of a composition by a man of culture is painting. That is why our Petrarch called Homer the “first painter whom antiquity records.” But take it that I am willing to do all I can, Fabrini, to satisfy those other requests of yours—especially since I have time enough for argument at my disposal today, and since no one will come along and disturb us; for the majority of the citizens are busy viewing the preparations made for the coming of the Queen of Poland, whose arrival is expected presently. I maintain that man’s ability to judge comes, in general, from practical experience of the way things are. And since nothing is more familiar and close to man than man himself, it follows that each man is qualified to pass judgment on what he daily sees—that is, to judge the beauty and ugliness of any individual human being. What produces beauty is nothing other than a harmony of proportion, such as resides in the human body in general, and in the relation of limb to limb in particular; and disproportion similarly gives rise to its opposite. Granted this, therefore, when the eye is called upon to make a judgment, who is the man who cannot distinguish the beautiful from the ugly? Certainly no one can fail, unless he lacks altogether both eyes and intellect. Thus, if man has (as indeed he does have) this knowledge of what the true form is for an individual of this kind—that is to say, a living human being—why should he not have the same

knowledge, only much more so, in the case of the supposititious reality of inanimate painting?

102 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TEN

Fab. Risponderanno per aventura, Signor Pietro, i Pittori, ch’essi non niegano, che, si come la Natura, comune madre di tutte le cose create, ha posta in tutti glihuomini una certa intelligenza del bene a del male: cosi non l’habbia posta del bello e del brutto. ma nella guisa, che per conoscer propriamente e pienamente quello, ch’é bene a male, é mestiero di lettere e di dottrina: cosi per saper con fondamento discernere il bello dal brutto, fa bisogno d’uno avedimento sottile, e d’un’arte separata. Laqual cosa é propria del Pittore.

Aret. Questo non é invero argomento, che conchiuda; perche altra cosa é l’occhio, altra l’intelletto. L’occhio non si puo ingannar nel vedere, se non é infermo, 0 losco, o impedito da qualche altro accidente. S’inganna bene, e molto spesso, l’intelletto, essendo adombrato da ignoranza, o da affettione. L’huomo disidera naturalmente il bene: ma puo errar nella elettione, giudicando bene quel che é male: come colui, ilquale é piu pronto a seguir quello, che stima utile, che l’honesto. E di qui ha bisogno del Filosofo.

Fab. Il medesimo si puo dir dell’occhio: che ingannato da certa apparenza, prende molte volte per bello quel ch’e brutto, e per brutto quel ch’é bello. Aret. Gia v’ho detto, che la pratica fa il giudicio: e vi affermo, ch’é piu agevole, che l’intelletto, che l’occhio, s’inganni. Non di meno tenete pur fermo, che in tutti € posto naturalmente un certo gusto del bene e del male, e cosi del bello e del brutto, in modo, ch’e’ lo conoscono. e si trovano molti, che senza lettere giudicano rettamente sopra i poemi, e le altre cose scritte: anzi la moltitudine é quella, che da comunemente il grido e la riputatione a Poeti, ad Oratori, a Comici, a Musici, & anco (e molto piu) a Pittori. Onde fu detto da Cicerone, che essendo cosi gran differenza da i dotti a gl’ignoranti, era pochissima nel giudicare. Et Apelle soleva metter le sue figure al giudicio comune. Potrei anco dire, che’l giudicio delle tre Dee fu rimesso a un Pastore. Ma io non intendo in generale della moltitudine, ma in particolare di alcuni belli ingegni: iquali havendo affinato il giudicio con le lettere e con la pratica, possono sicuramente giudicar di varie cose, e massimamente della Pittura, che appartiene all’occhio: istrumento meno errabile: e laquale si accosta alla natura nella imitation

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 103 TEN

Fab. Perhaps, sir, the painters would reply that they do not deny that in the same way that nature, the common mother of all created things, has implanted in all men a certain understanding of good and evil, she has also implanted a sense of the beautiful and the ugly; she has done this, however, in such a way that, just as one needs literature and learning for proper and full awareness of what is good and evil, so in order to be able to distinguish the beautiful from the ugly with real foundation, one needs a subtle discernment and a distinctive skill. And it is just this which the painter has. Aret. This is not in fact a conclusive argument—for the eye and the intellect are really different things. Unless it is hampered by infirmity, or a squint, or some other mischance, the eye cannot be deceived in its perception. The intellect, on the other hand, certainly can

be, and very often is, when overshadowed by ignorance or attachment. Man, of his nature, desires what is good. But he can make a mistake in his choice by looking favorably on something that is bad—like the person who follows what he regards as the path of profit more readily than the path of integrity. It is because of this that the philosopher is needed.

Fab. The same might equally be said of the eye; namely, that it is very often deceived by some outward show, and in consequence takes the ugly for the beautiful, and vice versa. Aret. I have already made the point that practical experience produces judgment; and | tell you roundly that the intellect is more prone to deception than the eye. Rest assured, none the less, that all men are endowed by nature with a certain sensitivity towards good and evil, and similarly towards beauty and ugliness, in such a way that they recognize these attributes. There are in fact a number of people who pass judgment correctly on poems

and other forms of writing without being men of letters; and it is usually the masses who provide poets, public speakers, actors, musicians and (to an even greater extent) painters with their fame and reputation. That is why Cicero said that, great as the distinction might be between the learned and the ignorant, there was very little of it when it came to judging; and why Apelles would expose his figures to the criticism of all comers. I could also mention that the judging of the three goddesses was put into the hands of a shepherd. My argument, however, does not turn generally on the masses, but specifically on certain men of fine intelligence, who have refined their powers of judg-

ment with the aid of literature and practical experience. In this way they can reliably judge a variety of things, and most expressly painting. For painting is an appurtenance of the eye, an instrument less subject to error, and draws close to nature in the imitation

a 104 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

ELEVEN

di quelle cose, che noi habbiamo sempre inanzi. Vedete, che Aristotele scrisse della Poesia, e non fu Poeta: scrisse dell’arte Oratoria, e perd non fu Oratore: scrisse anco (perche mi potreste dire, ch’egli quelle faculta havesse imparate, se ben non le esercitava) di animali e di altre cose, che non erano di sua professione. e similmente Plinio trattd di gemme, di

statue, e di Pittura: ne fu lapidario, ne statuario, ne Pittore. Non niego gia, che’l Pittore non possa haver cognitione di certe minutezze, di che non havra contezza un/altro, che Pittore non sia. Ma queste, se ben saranno importanti nell’operare, saranno elle poi di poco momento nel giudicare. Parmi per queste poche parole a bastanza haver dimostro, che ogni huomo ingenioso, havendo all’ ingegno aggiunta la pratica, puo giudicar della Pittura: e tanto piu, se e’ sara avezzo a veder le cose antiche, e le Pitture de’ buoni Maestri: perche havendo nella mente una certa imagine di perfettione, gli sia agevole di far giudicio, quanto le cose dipinte si accostino, o si allontanino da quella.

Fab. In questa parte rimango sodisfatto. Seguite in ragionar della dignita della Pittura: percioche sono alcuni, che poco prezzandola, si danno a credere, ch’ella sia arte mecanica.

Aret. Costoro Fabrini, non conoscono, quanto ella sia utile, necessaria, e di ornamento al

mondo & alle cose nostre. Non é dubbio, che ciascun’arte é tanto piu nobile, quanto ella é piu stimata da huomini di alta fortuna, e da pellegrini intelletti. La Pittura fu sempre in tutte l’eta havuta in sommo pregio da Re, da Imperadori, e da huomini prudentissimi. Ella adunque é nobilissima. Questo si prova agevolmente con gli esempi, che si leggono in Plinio, & in diversi Autori: iquali scrivono, che Alessandro Magna prezzo si fattamente la mirabile eccellenza di Apelle, ch’ei gli fece dono non pur di gioie e di thesori, ma della sua cara amica Campaspe, solo per haver conosciuto, che Apelle, ilquale l’haveva ritratta ignuda, se n’era di lei innamorato: liberalita incomparabile e maggiore, che se egli donato gli havesse un Regno, esendo che piu importa donar le affettioni di glianimi, che i Regni e le corone. Fab. Hoggidi non si trovano de gli Alessandri. Aret. Appresso ordind, che a niuno, fuor che ad Apelle, fosse lecito di dipingerlo dal naturale. E prendeva tanto diletto della Pittura, che spesso lo andava

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 105 ELEVEN

of those things which we have before us all the time. Notice that Aristotle wrote on poetics, without being a poet; he wrote on the art of rhetoric, yet he was not a public speaker. And (since you might tell me that he would have learnt these disciplines, even though he did not practice them) he also wrote on animals and other subjects which fell outside his profession. Similarly Pliny wrote treatises on precious stones, on statues and on painting, without being a lapidary or sculptor or painter. I do not deny, to be sure, that the artist might be versed in certain minutiae which another man, who was not a painter, would have no knowledge of. Important, however, though these details might be in terms of execution, they would be of small consequence when it came to criticism. With these few words I have, I think, made it clear enough that every intelligent man is capable of judging painting, if he has compounded this intelligence with practical experi-

ence. And his capacity will be that much the stronger if he should have made it his practice to look at antique objects and the paintings of masters of quality. For once he holds in his mind a certain image of perfection, it will be easy for him to judge how far painted objects approach that perfection or deviate from it.

Fab. I find this first part satisfactory. Go on to the subject of the nobility of painting; for there are some men who, in their low appraisal of it, are given to believing that it is a mechanical art. Aret. Those people, Fabrini, are unaware how useful and necessary it is, and how much of an ornament to the world and our affairs. There is no doubt that each art is the more noble,

the more it is appreciated by men of high fortune and rare intellects. Painting has always, in every age, been held in high esteem by kings, emperors and men of the greatest discernment. It is therefore supremely noble. The case histories one finds in the pages of Pliny provide an easy way of proving this. He and various other writers tell us that Alexander the Great valued the wonderful excellence of Apelles in such a way that he made him a gift, not of jewels or treasure, but of his well-loved mistress Campaspe, only

from having learned that Apelles, who had done her portrait in the nude, had thereby fallen in love with her. This was an incomparable act of generosity, greater than if Alexander had given the artist a kingdom; for the gift of one’s personal attachments means more than kingdoms or crowns. Fab. Today one does not find any Alexanders. Aret. Shortly afterwards he decreed that no one other than Apelles should be allowed to paint

him from the life. And he obtained so much pleasure from painting that he often went

106 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWELVE

a trovare alla sua stanza, e spendeva di molte hore in ragionar seco domesticamente, & in vederlo dipingere. E questo fu pur guell’Alessandro: ilquale oltre, ch’era stato molto bene introdotto nella cognition della Filosofia da Aristotele, che gli fu maestro, haveva posto il fine d’ogni sua gloria nell’arme, e nel vincere e soggiogare il mondo. Leggesi

ancora, che trovandosi il Re Demetrio con un grande esercito accampato a Rhodi: e potendo con molta facilita prender questa citta, se vi faceva accendere il fuoco in certa parte, dove era posta una tavola, dipinta da Prothogene: come che egli ardesse di disiderio d’impadronirsi di cosi nobile citta, elesse di perderla, perche l’opera di Prothogene non si abbruciasse: facendo maggiore istima d’una pittura, che d’una citta. Fab. Bellissimo esempio in lode della pittura. Aret. Ce ne sono de glialtri: come, essendo condotto Apelle da uno, che gli portava invidia, al convito di certo Re suo nimico, il Re conosciutolo, con fiero sguardo gli dimandé, perche

egli fosse stato cotanto audace, che havesse havuto ardimento di venire alla sua presenza. Apelle, non vi si trovando colui, che quivi l’‘haveva menato, prese un carbone in mano, e disegno prestamente nel muro la faccia di quel suo nimico, tanto simile alla vera, che dicendo egli al Re, costui @ quello, che mi vi ha condotto, il Re conosciutolo da quel

poco di macchia fatta da Apelle, gli perdond, mosso solamente da maraviglia della sua virtu. Dovete anco sapere, che i Fabii, nobilissima famiglia Romana, furono cognominati Pittori, per havere il primo di tal cognome dipinto in quella citta il tempio della salute.

Fab. Ricordomi, che Quinto Pedio, nipote di Cesare, da lui lasciato a parte dell’heredita con Ottavio, dipoi cognominato Augusto, essendo nato mutolo, fu da Messala Oratore posto ad imparare a dipingere: il cui consiglio fu lodato dal detto, conoscendo quel prudente Imperadore, che dopo le lettere non si trovava arte piu nobile della Pittura: e’ volendo con

guest’arte supplire al difetto della Natura. Ricordomi parimente, che alcuni huomini dotti furono Pittori: come Pacuvio antico Poeta, Demosthene Prencipe de’ Greci oratori. Metrodoro fu parimente Pittore e Filosofo: & anco il nostro Dante imparo a disegnare. Aret. E hoggidi qui in Vinegia Mons. il Barbaro eletto Patriarca di Aquilegia: Signor di gran valore, e d’infinita bonta: e parimente il dotto gentilhuomo

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 107 TWELVE

to find Appelles in his studio, and passed many hours in familiar conversation with him,

and in watching him at work. And this was the same Alexander who, besides having gained an excellent introduction to the understanding of philosophy from Aristotle, who

was his instructor, had made armed warfare and the conquest and subjugation of the world into the goal that would consummate all his claims to glory. One also reads how King Demetrius came to be encamped at Rhodes with a large army, and could with great ease have taken the city by setting fire to a certain section of it. This section, however, housed a picture executed by Protogenes; and though the King was burning with desire to take possession of so noble a city, he elected to let it go by, so that the work of Protogenes should not burn up, thus setting greater store by a painting than by a city. Fab. A really splendid example of respect for the art of painting.

Aret. There are others like it. Apelles, for example, was taken by a man who had a grudge against him to the banquet of a certain king, who was no friend of his. The king recognized Apelles, and with a stern glance asked him why he had been so bold as to dare to come before him. The man who had brought the artist was no longer there. So Apelles took a piece of charcoal in his hand, and swiftly drew on the wall the face of this enemy. The likeness was such that when he said to the king, “This is the man who brought me here,” the king recognized who was meant, even from the slight sketch that Apelles had

made, and pardoned the painter, purely out of admiration for his dexterity. You must also know that the Fabii, a Roman family of the highest nobility, were bearers of the cognomen Pictor, because the first Fabius called this way had decorated the Temple of Salus in that city. Fab. I recall that there was a nephew, Quintus Pedius, whom Caesar had singled out to be his heir, along with the Octavius who subsequently earned the cognomen of Augustus. Since this Quintus had been born dumb, Messala the orator arranged for him to learn painting. And Caesar commended this piece of wisdom on Messala’s part; sagacious emperor that he was, he recognized that painting was second only to literature in its artistic nobility,

and wanted this art to supply what nature had left wanting. It also comes back to me that certain men of learning were painters: like Pacuvius, poet of antiquity, Demosthenes, prince of Greek orators, and Metrodorus, who was both a painter and a philosopher. Similarly our own Dante learned to draw.

Aret. And today we have here in Venice Monsignore Barbaro, the patriarch-elect of Aquileia,

a nobleman of great worth and infinite goodness, and also that learned gentleman,

108 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento THIRTEEN

M. Francesco Morosini: iquali due disegnano e dipingono leggiadramente: oltre una infinita di altri gentil’huomini, che si dilettano della Pittura, tra iquali v’e il Mag. M. Alessandro Contarini, non meno ornato di lettere, che di altre rare virtu. Ma seguendo le grandezze de’ Prencipi, che dird di Carlo Quinto: ilquale, come emulo di Alessandro Magno, per le molte cure, e per i travagli quasi continui, che gli apportano le cose della guerra, non lascia di volger molte volte il pensiero a quest’arte. laguale ama et apprezza

tanto, che essendogli pervenuta all’orecchie la fama del divin Titiano, con benigni et amorevoli inviti due volte lo chiamé alla corte: dove oltre allo haverlo honorato al pari de” primi personaggi, che erano in essa corte, gli concesse privilegi, provisioni, e premi grandissimi: e d’un sol ritratto, ch’ei gli fece in Bologna, mille scudi ordind, che eli fossero dati. et anco Alfonso Duca di Ferrara si mostré molto amico della Pittura: e diede

al medesimo trecento scudi per un ritratto di se stesso, fatto dalla sua mano. Ilguale veduto poi da Michel’Agnolo, ei lo ammird e lodé infinitamente, dicendo, ch’egli non haveva creduto, che l’arte potesse far tanto: e che solo Titiano era degno del nome di Pittore.

Fab. Percerto la eccellenza di questo huomo é tanta, che, quando I’Imperadore e’l Duca di Ferrara gli havesser donato una citta, non l’havrebbono premiata a bastanza. Ma non resta che Michel’Agnolo non sia Michel’Agnolo.

Aret. Aspettate pure. Il Re Filippo ancora, degno figliuolo di tanto Prencipe, ama & honora la Pittura: e delle molte opere, che gli manda spesso Titiano, spero, che un giorno se ne vedranno premi degni della grandezza di si fatto Re, e della virti di cotal Pittore. Ho similmente inteso, che l’uno e I’altro sanno disegnare. E M. Enea Vico Parmigiano, non solo intagliator di stampe di rame hoggidi senza uguale, ma letterato, e sottile investigator delle cose appartinenti alle cognition delle historie: come si vede ne’ libri delle sue Medaglie, e della genealogia de’ Cesari: essendo gia qualche anno ritornato dalla corte, mi racconto, che appresentato ch’egli hebbe a Cesare il rame del suo politissimo intaglio: nel quale fra diversi ornamenti di figure, che dinotano le imprese e la gloria di sua Maesta, si contiene il suo ritratto: Cesare presolo in mano, & appoggiatosi a una fenestra, lo drizzo al suo lume: e dopo lo haverlo riguardato intentamente buona pezza, oltre al disiderio, che dimostro, che di quello si stampassero

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 109 THIRTEEN

Messer Francesco Morosini—both of whom draw and paint with finesse. There are, too, countless other gentlemen here who take delight in pictures; they include Messer Alessandro Contarini, whose literary distinction is on a par with his other exceptional talents. But to continue with the greatness of princes, what shall I say of Charles the Fifth, who, rivalling Alexander the Great in the multitude of his preoccupations, and in the almost continuous labors that martial affairs impose upon him, still does not omit to turn his thoughts to this art on many occasions? Indeed, he loves and esteems it so much, that when the fame of the divine Titian reached his ears, he summoned Titian to his court

twice over, on generous and friendly terms of invitation. There he not only honored Titian on equal terms with the top-ranking people who were at this court; he also granted him privileges, subsistence, and rewards on a tremendous scale, even ordering a payment of a thousand scidi for a single portrait which Titian did for him at Bologna. Duke Alfonso of Ferrara also showed himself to be a staunch friend of painting, paying Titian three hundred scudi for a portrait of himself from the artist’s own hand. Subsequently Michelangelo saw this same portrait and admired and praised it beyond bounds, saying that he would not have believed that art could achieve so much, and that Titian alone deserved the title of painter. Fab. Certainly this man’s excellence was such that were the Emperor and the Duke of Ferrara to have given him a city, they would not have recompensed him adequately. But Michelangelo remains Michelangelo all the same. Aret. Wait a moment. King Philip too, worthy son of so outstanding a prince, loves and honors painting; and I hope that the many works that Titian keeps sending to him will one day produce rewards commensurate with the majesty of such a monarch and the mastery of

such a painter. Equally I have heard that both father and son can draw. And Messer Aenea Vico Parmigiano, who is not only an engraver without equal today, but also a man of letters and, where knowledge of historical subject matter is concerned, an adroit researcher into the relevant materials—as one recognizes from the books containing his medals and his genealogy of the Caesars—told me, some years after his return from the court, the following story. When he presented to the Emperor the copper plate for his extremely finished engraving, which comprises the Imperial portrait and a surround of various ornamental figures, symbolizing his Highness’s exploits and his glory, the Em-

peror took it in his hand, and leaning on a window, held it up to the light. Then, after studying it intently for quite a time, he not only expressed his desire that many prints

110 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FOURTEEN

molte carte, non si potendo cio fare, perche il rame era indorato, discorrendo seco minutamente d’intorno alla inventione, & al disegno, diede un buon saggio di esserne intendente tanto, quanto molti altri, che ne facciano professione: 0 poco meno: e fece annoverare al medesimo dugento scudi. Fab. Mi viene in memoria di haver letto in Suetonio, che ancora Nerone Imperadore (per altro vitioso e crudele) dipingeva, e faceva di sua mano rilievi di terra bellissimi: e Giulio Cesare parimente soleva esser vaghissimo di Pitture e d’intagli. Aret. Dilettossene etiandio Adriano Imperadore, & Alessandro Severo, figliuolo di Mammea, & alcuni altri. E se vogliamo riguardare a prezzi, con che furono comperate diverse Pitture, gli troveremo quasi infiniti. Percioche si legge, che Tiberio ne pago una sessanta sestertii: che fanno cento cinquanta libbre d’argento Romane. Et il Re Attalo comperé una tavola d’Aristide Thebano per cento talenti: che vagliono, riducendogli alla nostra moneta, sessanta mila Scudi.

Fab. So, che si trovarono similmente alcuni Pittori: (tra quali fu Zeusi) iguali stimando, che ne l’argento, ne l’oro bastassero a pagar compiutamente le loro opere, le donavano. Aret. E ben vero, ch’a nostri di comunemente i Prencipi sono molto piu ristretti ne’ premi di tali gloriose fatiche, che gli antichi a que’ buoni tempi non erano: come aviene anco ne gli honorati sudori de’ letterati. Fab. E questo diede cagione all’arguto e piacevole Martiale di dire. Trovinsi, Flacco, pur de’ Mecenati, Che Virgiliit hoggidi non mancheranno.

Aret. Non dimeno oltre a quello, che s’é detto di Titiano, Leonardo Vinci, gran Pittore, fu largamente donato, & infinitamente honorato da Filippo Duca di Melano, e dal liberalissimo Francesco Re di Francia, nelle cui braccia egli si mori vecchissimo di molti anni. Rafaello da Papa Giulio Secondo, e poscia da Leone Decimo, e Michel’Agnolo da que’ due Pontefici, e da Papa Paolo Terzo: dal quale ancora fu honorato pur Titiano nel tempo, ch’egli fece il suo ritratto in Roma, e quella bellissima nuda per il Cardinal Farnese, che fu con maraviglia piu d’una volta veduta da Michel’Agnolo. E stato egli oltre a cio piu volte ricerco da tutti i Duchi e Signori, cosi Italiani, come Tedeschi.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 111 FOURTEEN

should be made from it—a thing which was actually impossible, seeing that the plate was gilded—but also ran through the invention and design in minute detail, thereby making it good and plain that he understood as much (or almost as much) of the business as many others professionally engaged in it; and finally he ordered a payment to Parmigiano of two hundred scudi.

Fab. JI remember having read in Suetonius that even the Emperor Nero (otherwise a licentious and cruel character) practiced painting, and personally made terra-cotta bas-reliefs of great beauty: Julius Caesar too used to be very fond of paintings and intaglios. Aret. The Emperor Hadrian and Alexander Severus, the son of Mammea, were also devotees, along with several others. And if we care to look at the prices that were paid for various pictures then, we will find them almost immeasurable. For one reads that in one case Tiberius paid sixty sesterces, the equivalent of one hundred and fifty pounds of Roman silver. And that King Attalus bought a panel from Aristides of Thebes for a hundred talents—that is, converting the amount to our own currency, sixty thousand scudi. Fab. J know that there have similarly been certain artists—Zeuxis was one of them—who reckoned there was neither silver nor gold enough to pay for their creations in full; so they gave them away.

Aret. It is quite true that the royalty of our day is, by and large, far more restricted in the rewards it offers for such glorious efforts than the ancients were in those fortunate times. And the same applies to the honored labors of men of letters. Fab. This is what prompted Martial to say, with his typical wit and charm: If only there were patrons like Maecenas, then today There'd be Virgils, my good Flaccus, in very rich array.

Aret. Furthermore, above and beyond what has now been said of Titian, the great painter Leonardo da Vinci was granted abundant bounties and vast honors by Philip, Duke of Milan, and also by the extremely generous King Francis the First of France, in whose arms he died at a great age. Raphael was taken up by Pope Julius the Second, and subsequently by Pope Leo the Tenth; Michelangelo by both these pontiffs, and also by Pope Paul the Third, who also honored Titian at the time when he was in Rome painting the Pope’s portrait, and that loveliest of nude figures for the Cardinal Farnese, which Michelangelo saw with amazement more than once. Titian was also sought after many times over by all the dukes and lords of both Italy and Germany.

a 112 Dolce’s ““Aretino”’ and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

FIFTEEN

Fab. Meritamente furono sempre stimati i Pittori: perche e’ pare, che essi d’ingegno e di

animo avanzino glialtri huomini: poi che le cose, che Dio fatte ha, ardiscono con l’arte loro d’imitare, e le ci appresentano in modo, che paion vere. Onde non mi fo maraviglia, che i Greci conoscendo la grandezza della Pittura, prohibissero a servi il dipingere: e che Aristotele separi quest’arte dalle Mecaniche, dicendo, che si dovrebbe per le citta instituir publiche scuole, ove i fanciulli l’apparassero. Aret. Fin qui adunque habbiamo veduto in buona parte la nobilta della Pittura, & in quanto pregio fossero e siano i buoni Pittori: veggiamo hora, quanto ella sia utile, dilettevole, e di ornamento. Prima non é dubbio, ch’é di gran beneficio a gli huomini il veder dipinta la imagine del nostro Redentore, della Vergine, e di diversi Santi e Sante. E puossi prendere argomento da questo: che ancora che alcuni Imperadori, e massimamente Greci, prohibissero l’uso publico delle imagini, esso da molti Pontefici ne’ Sagri concilii fu approvato: e la chiesa danna per Heretici coloro, che non le accettano. Perche le imagini non pur sono, come si dice, libri de gl’ignoranti: ma (quasi piacevolissimi svegliatoi) destano anco a divotione gl’intendenti: questi e quelli inalzando alla consideratione di cio, ch’elle rappresentano. Onde si legge, che Giulio Cesare veggendo in Ispagna una statua di Alessandro Magno: e mosso da quella a considerar, che Alessandro ne glianni, ne’ quali esso

alhora si trovava, haveva quasi acquistato il mondo, e che da lui non si era ancor

fatta cosa degna di gloria, pianse: e tanto s’infiammo nel disiderio della immortalita, che si mise di poi a quelle alte imprese, per lequali non solo si fece eguale ad Alessandro, ma lo supero. Scrive anco Sallustio, che Quinto Fabio, e Publio Scipione solevano

dire, che quando riguardavano le imagini de’ maggiori, si sentivano accender tutti alla virtti: non che la cera o il marmo, di ch’era fatta la imagine, havesse tanta forza: ma cresceva la fiamma ne glianimi di que’ egregi huomini per la memoria de’ fatti illustri:

ne prima si acquetava, che essi con le loro prodezze non havevano aguagliata la lor gloria. Le imagini adunque de’ buoni e de’ virtuosi infiammano glihuomini, come io dico, alla virtt & alle opere buone. Et oltre alle cose della religione, apporta ancora quest’arte utile

aiPrencipi, & ai Capitani, veggendo essi spesse volte disegnati i siti de’ luoghi, e delle

citta, prima che incaminino gli eserciti, e si pongano

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 113 FIFTEEN

Fab. Painters have always been deservedly appreciated, for it appears that they surpass the rest of humanity in intellect and spirit, daring as they do to imitate with their art the things which God has created, and to put the latter before us in such a way that they appear real. So it does not surprise me that the Greeks, recognizing the greatness of painting, forbade slaves to practice it; and that Aristotle distinguished it from the mechanical arts, recommending that public schools should be set up from city to city, where boys could learn to paint.

Aret. Up to this point, then, we have dealt in satisfactory terms with the nobility of painting and the high valuation of painters of quality, both in the past and today. Now let us consider to what degree it may be of use and please and be ornamental. There is no doubt in the first place that it is greatly beneficial for mankind to see in painted form the image of Our Redeemer, or those of the Virgin and various saints, both male and female. One can make a case for this on the following basis. Even though certain emperors—especially Greek ones—laid an embargo on the public use of images, numerous Popes in Sacred Councils approved this practice, and the Church condemns as heretics those who do not accept them. Indeed images are not only, as the saying goes, the books of the ignorant, but also (almost like stimuli of a highly agreeable kind) awaken the understanding to their devotions—lifting both the former and the latter into contemplating the subject which they represent. So one reads that Julius Caesar wept on seeing a statue of Alexander the Great in Spain, moved by it to contemplate how, by the time of life he had now reached himself, Alexander had virtually taken possession of the world—whereas he had not yet done anything worthy of glory. And he was so inflamed with a craving for immortality that he thereupon engaged in those high enterprises, by dint of which he did not merely make himself the equal of Alexander, but surpassed him. Again, Sallust records that Quintus Fabius and Publius Scipio used to say that, when they looked at their ancestral images, they felt themselves on fire to show their worth. Not that the wax or marble out of which the busts were fashioned possessed such motive power—rather the flame in the souls of these men of distinction grew high when they remembered illustrious deeds, nor did it subside until with their own acts of prowess they had equalled that ancestral glory. So, as I say, images of the upright and the virtuous excite mankind to virtue and good deeds. And quite apart from matters of religion, this art also does service to princes and captains. Frequently they inspect the layout of tracts and cities in the shape of drawings before their armies move off and take up

a

114 Dolce’s ‘‘Aretino’”’ and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento SIXTEEN

a veruno assalto. onde si puo dire, che la sola mano del Pittore sia lor guida: essendo che il disegno @ proprio di esso Pittore. Hassi ancora a riconoscer dal Pittore la carta del navigare, e parimente da lui hanno origine e forma tutte le arti manuali. Perche Architetti, Muratori, Intagliatori, Orefici, Ricamatori, Legnaiuoli, & insino i Fabbri, tutti ricorrono al disegno: proprio, come s’é detto, del Pittore. Fab. Non si puo negare: percioche di qualunque cosa, volendo significar, che ella sia bella, si dice, lei haver disegno.

Aret. Quanto al diletto, benche cio si possa comprender dalle cose dette innanzi, aggiungo, che non é cosa, che tanto soglia tirare a se, e pascer gliocchi de’ riguardanti, quanto fa la Pittura: non le gemme, non I’oro istesso. Anzi questo e quelle sono piu stimati, se qualche intaglio, o lavoro di mano di artificioso Maestro in se contengono: o che siano figure d’huomini, o d’animali, 0 altra cosa, che habbia disegno e vaghezza. E questo non solamente aviene a coloro, che sanno, ma al volgo ignorante, & anco a fanciulli: iquali talhor veggendo qualche imagine dipinta, la dimostrano quasi sempre col dito: e pare, che tutti s’ingombrino di dolcezza i lor pargoletti cuori. Fab. I] medesimo scrive il Castiglione in una sua bellissima Elegia Latina, che aveniva a suoi

piccioli figliuoletti nel riguardare il suo ritratto fatto da Rafaello, che hora si trova in Mantova: & é opera degna del suo nome.

Aret. Infine chi é colui, che non comprenda Il’ornamento, che porge la Pittura a qualunque

cosa? Percioche e i publici edifici & i privati, benche siano i muri di dentro vestiti di finis-

simi arazzi: e le casse, e le tavole coperte di bellissimi tapeti, senza l’ornamento di

qualche pittura assai di bellezza e di gratia perdono. E di fuori molto piu dilettano a gliocchi altrui le facciate delle case e de’ palagi dipinte per mano di buon Maestro, che con la incrostatura di bianchi marmi, di porfidi, e di serpentini fregiati di oro. II simile vi dico delle chiese e de’ sacri chiostri. Onde non senza cagone i pontefici da me detti procurarono, che le stanze del palagio Papale fossero dipinte da Rafaello, e le capelle di San Pietro, e di San Paolo da Michel’Agnolo: e questa Illustris. Signoria fece

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 115 SIXTEEN

position for any kind of assault. So one can say that they are guided by the draftsman’s hand alone, draftsmanship being indigenous to the artist in question. One must also acknowledge the navigation map as the artist’s creation, and equally all the manual skills take from him their origin and their form. For architects, masons, engravers, goldsmiths, embroiderers, woodworkers and even smiths all have recourse to draftsmanship, and the latter, as I have said, already belongs in the painter’s province. Fab. That is undeniable: for if one wants to indicate that an object of any kind is beautiful, one says that it has design. Aret. As for its power to please, one can gather this from our previous comments. I would add, however, that there is nothing that habitually draws attention to itself and feasts the beholder’s eyes to the same degree as painting does—not jewelry nor gold itself. Both of these last two, in fact, are prized the more if their makeup includes some engraving or work from the hand of a skillful master, or if they take the form of human or animal figures or anything else which possesses design and gracefulness. And this applies not only to those who are connoisseurs, but also to the ignorant masses and even to children. For on the occasions when children set eyes on some painted image, they almost invari-

ably point their fingers at it; and it appears in this way that their babyish hearts are chock-full of sweetness.

Fab. Castiglione in one extremely beautiful Latin elegy of his writes that this very thing hap-

pened to his tiny little children when they looked at the portrait of him executed by Raphael—a work which is currently in Mantua, and is worthy of this artist’s name. Aret. Is there a man, finally, who does not understand the ornament that painting offers to any object at all? For though their interior walls be dressed in extremely fine tapestries, and though the chests and tables be covered with most beautiful cloths, both public and private buildings suffer a marked loss of beauty and charm without some painting to orna-

ment them. Outside, too, the facades of houses and palaces give far greater pleasure to the eyes of other men when painted by the hand of a master of quality than they do with incrustations of white marble and porphyry and serpentine embellished with gold. And I maintain that the same is true of churches and religious cloisters. It was not without reason, then, that the Popes J named earlier commissioned from Raphael the fresco-

ing of the apartments in the Papal Palace, and from Michelangelo that of the Sistine Chapel and the Pauline Chapel. In the same way this illustrious Government of ours had

a 116 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento

SEVENTEEN

dipinger la Sala del gran consiglio a diversi Pittori piu e meno valenti, secondo quelle eta roze, e non ancora capaci dell’eccellenza della Pittura. E dipoi vi ha fatto far due quadri a Titiano. I] cui pennello volesse Dio, che l’havesse tutta dipinta: che forse hoggidi la medesima sarebbe uno de’ piu belli & honorati spettacoli, che si vedesse in Italia. Fece

ancora (ma molto a dietro) dipinger dal di fuori il fondaco de’ Tedeschi a Giorgio da Castelfranco: & a Titiano medesimo, che alhora era giovanetto, fu allogata quella parte, che riguarda la Merceria. Di che diré al fine alquante parole. Ma di questa parte non

accade dire altro: se non, che fra costumi Barbari de gl’infedeli, questo é il peggiore, che non compartano, che in fra di loro si faccia alcuna imagine di Pittura, ne di Scoltura. E ancora la Pittura necessaria: percioche senza il suo aiuto noi non havressimo (come s’é potuto conoscere) ne habitatione, ne cosa alcuna, che appartenga all’uso civile. Fab. Voi havete, Signor Pietro, secondo il mio parere, ragionato molto a pieno della dignita della pittura. Hora vi sia in grado di seguir la materia ordinata, accio che io sappia fare il guidicio, ch’io ricerco.

Aret. Havrei potuto assai piu allargarmi: ma non essendo cio appartinente al paragone, per cui parliamo, bastera questo a sodisfation della vostra richiesta. E tornando nel camino, donde uscito io sono, havendo diffinita la Pittura, o detto, qual sia l’ufficio del Pittore, seguiro hora ogni sua parte. Fab. Gia mi diletta molto questo ragionamento: e veggio, che voi ragionate copiosamente, e con molto ordine. Aret. Tutta la somma della Pittura a mio giudicio é divisa in tre parti: Inventione, Disegno, e Colorito. La inventione é la favola, o historia, che’l Pittore si elegge da lui stesso, o gli e posta inanzi da altri per materia di quello, che ha da operare. II disegno e la forma, con che egli la rappresenta. II colorito serve a quelle tinte, con lequali la Natura dipinge (che cosi si puo dire) diversamente le cose animate & inanimate. Animate: come sono glihuomini e gli animali bruti: inanimate, come i sassi, l’herbe, le piante, e cose tali: benche gueste ancora siano nella spetie loro animate, essendo elleno partecipi di quell’anima, che é detta vegeta-

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 117 SEVENTEEN

the Sala del Gran Consiglio painted by various artists who were more or less skillful, even as the style of the times was rough, and not yet capable of producing pictorial excellence. Subsequently it called on Titian to do two canvases there. And would to God that his brush had done the painting in its entirety; for then perhaps this same Sala today would be one of the most beautiful and respected sights to be found in Italy. Again—though much earlier this time—the Government gave Giorgione of Castelfranco the task of painting the exterior of the Fondaco de’ Tedeschi. And the part which faces the Merceria was allocated to Titian, who was in his youth at the time. About this last I shall say a few words at the close. In present context I refrain from saying anything else, except only that, amongst the barbarous customs of the infidel races, the one which is worst is their refusal to allow the making in their country of any painted or sculptured image. Furthermore, painting is necessary; for without its assistance (as people have come to realize) we would not possess either a place to live in or any of those things which are associated with civilized custom.

Fab. In my opinion, sir, you have argued very fully for the dignity of painting. I would be grateful now if you would continue into our schedule of topics, so that I can make the judgment of which I am in search.

Aret. I could indeed have spread myself out considerably farther. But to do this would not have been pertinent to the comparison we are aiming for in our discussion. So this much will do by way of satisfying your request. And now, returning to the track from which I departed, having defined painting or told you what the painter’s function is, I will then go on to consider each one of its elements.

Fab. I am already greatly pleased with this line you are taking, and observe too that you spread yourself wide and argue in a most systematic way. Aret. The whole sum of painting is, in my opinion, divided into three parts: invention, design and coloring. The invention is the fable or history which the painter chooses on his own

or which others present him with, as material for the work he has to do. The design is the form he uses to represent this material. And the coloring takes its cue from the hues with which nature paints (for one can say as much) animate and inanimate things in variegation. Examples of animate things would be human beings and wild animals; of inanimate ones, rocks, grasses, plants and so on—although these again are “animate” after their kind, inasmuch as they partake of that form of life which is called “vegeta-

118 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento EIGHTEEN

tiva: la quale le perpetua e mantiene. Ma ragioneré da Pittore, e non da Filosofo. Fab. A me parete l’uno e l’altro. Aret. Piacemi, se cosi é. E cominciando dalla inventione, in questa dico, che vi entrano molte parti: tra lequali sono le principali l’ordine e la convenevolezza. Percioche, se’l Pittore

(per cagion di esempio) havra a dipinger Christo, o San Paolo, che predichi, non ista bene, che lo faccia ignudo, o lo vesti da soldato, o da marinaio: ma bisogna, ch’e’ consideri un’habito conveniente all’uno & all’altro: e principalmente di dare a Christo una effigie grave accompagnata da una amabile benignita e dolcezza: e cosi di far San Paolo con aspetto, che a tanto Apostolo si conviene, in modo, che l’occhio, che riguarda, stimi di vedere un vero ritratto, si del datore della salute, come del vaso di elettione. Onde non senza cagione fu detto a Donatello, il quale haveva fatto un Crocefisso di legno, ch’egli haveva messo in Croce un contadino; ancora che a Donatello nell’arte della Scoltura si trovasse ne’ tempi moderni niun pari, e un solo Michel’Agnolo superiore. Similmente havendo il Pittore a dipinger Mosé, non dovra fare una figura meschina, ma tutta piena di grandezza e di maesta. Di qui terra sempre riguardo alla qualita delle persone, ne meno alle nationi, a costumi, a luoghi, & a tempi: tal, che se depingera un fatto d’arme di Cesare, o di Alessandro Magno, non conviene, che armi i soldati nel modo, che si costuma hoggidi, & ad altra guisa fara le armature a Macedoni, ad altra a Romani: e se gli verra imposto carico di rappresentare una battaglia moderna, non si ricerca, che la divisi all’antica. Cosi volendo raffigurar Cesare, saria cosa ridicola, ch’ ei gli mettesse in testa uno invoglio da Turco, o una berretta delle nostre, o pure alla Vinitiana. Fab. Questa parte della convenevolezza é ancora necessarissima a gli Scrittori, tanto, che senza essa non possono far cosa perfetta. Onde ben disse Horatio, che in una Comedia importa molto, che habbia a favellare il servo, o il padrone. Onde e’ va toccando le conditioni, che si debbono serbare in Achille, e quelle che in Oreste, in Medea, & in altri.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 119 EIGHTEEN

tive,” and which is responsible for their perpetuation and maintenance. But IJ will present my case from a painter’s, rather than a philosopher’s, point of view. Fab. You seem to me to combine both of these viewpoints. Aret. If this is so I am delighted. And now let me begin with invention. I maintain that a great many constituents enter in here, the most important ones being order and propriety. For suppose, by way of an example, that the painter should need to paint Christ or St. Paul

preaching. It does not do for him to paint a nude or dress his figure in the manner of a soldier or a sailor. Rather, he needs to work out a costume appropriate to the one and the other. Above all, he needs to give Christ a solemn countenance accompanied by a likeable benignity and sweetness, and similarly to endow St. Paul with an appearance appropriate to such a great Apostle, in such a way that the spectator’s eye accepts what it sees as an authentic portrait, in the one case of the giver of salvation and in the other case of the vessel of divine choice. Thus Donatello, who had sculpted a wooden crucifix, was not unreasonably told that he had put a peasant onto the Cross—even though in modern times no equal of Donatello’s in the art of sculpture may be found, and only one Michelangelo who surpasses him. Similarly, when the painter needs to depict Moses, he ought not to produce a paltry figure, but one completely filled with grandeur and majesty. On this account he should always pay attention to the personal qualities of his subjects; and he should consider to the same degree questions of nationality, dress, setting and period. If, for instance, he should be depicting a military action of Caesar or Alexander the Great, it is inappropriate that he should arm the soldiers in the fashion which prevails nowadays. And he should put one kind of armor on the Macedonians and another kind on the Romans. Again, should he be assigned the representation of a modern battle, there is no call for him to divide it up as if it were an ancient one. And similarly, if he wanted to represent Caesar, it would be a ridiculous thing for him to place on the head in question a Turkish turban, or one of our caps, or indeed one in the Venetian style. Fab. This element of propriety is a great necessity for writers as well—so much so, that with-

out it they are incapable of producing anything perfect. Hence Horace was justified in saying that, in the case of a comedy, what the valet or the master is made to say matters a great deal. And he then proceeds to touch on the conditions that should be observed in characterizing Achilles, and those which apply to Orestes, Medea and others.

120 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento NINETEEN

Aret. Erro nella convenevolezza non solo de gli habiti, ma anco de’ volti Alberto Duro: ilquale, perche era Tedesco, disegno in piu luoghi la Madre del Signore con habito da Tedesca, e

similmente tutte quelle sante Donne, che l’accompagnano. Ne resto ancora di dare a Giudei effigie pur da Tedeschi, con que’ mostacchi e capigliature bizarre, ch’essi portano, e con i panni, che usano. Ma di questi errori, che appartengono alla convenevolezza della

inventione, ne toccherd forse alcuno, quando verr6é al paragone di Rafaello, e di Michel’Agnolo.

Fab. Vorrei, Signor Pietro, che non solamente tocaste gli estremi vitiosi, ne’ quali non caggiono, senon gli sciocchi; ma che ragionaste ancora di quelle parti, lequali confinano col vitio e con la virtu: ove anco i grand’huomini alle volte inciampano. Aret. Questo fard. Ma stimate voi, che fosse peraventura sciocco Alberto Duro? Egli fu valente Pittore, & in questa parte della inventione stupendo. E, se l’istesso fosse nato cosi in Italia, come nacque in Germania (nella quale avenga, che in diversi tempi vi habbiano fiorito ingegni nobilissimi, cosi nelle lettere, come in varie arti, la perfettion della Pittura, non vi

ce

fu giamai) mi giova a credere, ch’ei non sarebbe stato inferiore ad alcuno. E per testimonio di cio vi affermo, che l’istesso Rafaello non si recava a vergogna di tener le carte di Alberto attaccate nel suo studio, e le lodava grandemente. E, quando egli non havesse havuto altra eccellenza, basterebbe a farlo immortale l’intaglio delle sue stampe di rame: ilquale intaglio con una minutezza incomparabile rappresenta il vero & il vivo della natura, di modo, che le cose sue paiono non disegnate, ma dipinte; e non dipinte, ma vive. Fab. Ho vedute alcune sue carte; lequali nel vero in questa parte m’hanno fatto stupire. Aret. Questo é quanto alla convenevolezza. Quanto all’ordine, ¢ mistiero, che’l Pittore vada di parte in parte rassembrando il successo della historia, che ha presa a dipingere, cosi propriamente, che i riguardanti stimino, che quel fatto non debba essere avenuto altrimenti di quello, che da lui é dipinto. Ne ponga quello, che ha ad essere inanzi, dapoi; ne quello, c’ha ad esser dapoi, inanzi, disponendo ordinatissimamente le cose, nel modo, che elle seguirono. Fab. Questo istesso insegna Aristotele nella sua Poetica a gli Scrittori di Tragedie e di Comedie.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 121 NINETEEN

Aret. Albrecht Diirer’s sense of propriety was at fault not only in the case of costumes, but also in the case of faces. Being a German, he did several compositions in which the Mother of Our Lord is given a German costume, and the same for all those holy ladies who accompany her. Nor again did he refrain from giving his Jews features which are really Germanic, including those moustaches and weird hair styles that the Germans indulge in and the clothes they wear. But I will perhaps touch on one of these errors which relate to propriety of invention, when I come to the comparison between Raphael and Michelangelo.

Fab. Sir, I would like you not only to touch on the extremes of iniquity to which no one descends except fools, but also to discuss those elements that stand on the borderline of both the bad and the good, so that even great men stumble on occasion here. Aret. I will do this. But do you by any chance consider that Albrecht Diirer was a fool? He was a capable painter, and a marvel in this matter of invention. If the same man had been born in Italy who was born in Germany (the fact is that in the latter country, in the case of both literature and arts of different kinds, noble intellects have flourished at various periods; whereas painting never once attained perfection there), it pleases me to believe that he would have proved second to none. And I bring to your notice in evidence here how Raphael himself kept Diirer’s engravings pinned up in his studio without any vestige of shame, and indeed praised them highly. And supposing that Diirer had been excellent in no other way, the intaglio of his copper-plate engravings would suffice to render him immortal. For this intaglio represents the reality and vitality of nature with an incomparable closeness of detail, in such a way that his creations have the look of being not drawn, but painted; and not painted, but alive. Fab. I have seen some of his engravings, and in this respect they have really amazed me. Aret. So much for propriety. As for disposition, it is necessary that the artist move from section to section following the course of time in the narrative he has undertaken to paint, and do so with such propriety that the spectators judge that this affair could not have taken place in any other way than the one he has depicted. He should not place later in time what ought to come earlier, nor earlier what should come later, but lay things out in a most ordered fashion, according to the way in which they succeeded one another.

Fab. Aristotle in his Poetics give this same piece of instruction to writers of tragedy and comedy.

122 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWENTY

Aret. Ecco Timante, uno de’ lodati Pittori antichi; ilquale dipinse Ifigenia, figliuola di Agamennone, di cui Euripide compose quella bella Tragedia, che fu tradotta dal Dolce, e ricitata qui in Vinegia alcuni anni sono: la dipinse dico inanzi all’altare, ove essa aspettava di essere uccisa in sacrificio a Diana. & havendo il Pittore nelle faccie de’ circostanti espressa diversamente ogni imagine di dolore, non si assicurando di poterla dimostrar maggiore nel volto del dolente padre, fece, che egli se lo copriva con un panno di lino, overo col lembo della vesta: senza, che Timante ancora serb6é in cio molto bene la convenevolezza: perche essendo Agamennone padre, pareva, ch’e’ non dovesse poter sofferire di veder con gliocchi propri amazzar la figliuola. Fab. Bellissima nel vero inventione fu questa. Aret. Parrhasio similmente, illustre Pittore di quella eta, fece due figure: l’una dellequali contendendo della vittoria, pareva, che sudasse: l’altra si disarmava, e sembrava, che ansasse. Questi due esempi di Pittori antichi possono dimostrar di quanta importanza al Pittore sia la inventione; perche da lei derivano, overo seco si accompagnano tutte le belle parti del disegno: ne resterd piu inanzi di dirne alcuno de’ Pittori moderni. Non meno dee imaginarsi il Pittore i siti, e gli edifici simili alla qualita de’ paesi, in guisa, che non attribuisca ad uno quello, ch’é proprio dell’altro. Onde non fu molto prudente quel Pittore: ilquale dipingendo Mose, che con la verga percotendo il sasso, ne fece uscir miracolosamente fuori l’acqua disiderata da gli Hebrei, finse un paese fertile, herboso, e cinto di vaghe Montagnette: si, perche la historia pone, che questo miracolo avenisse nel deserto: si ancora, perche ne’ luoghi fertili v’e sempre abondanza d’acqua. Fab. Bisogna certamente, che’l Pittore habbia un fiorito ingegno, & non dorma punto nella inventione. Vedete, come bene Horatio nel principio della sua Poetica, scritta a i Pisoni, volendo favellar pur della inventione; e prendendo la similitudine dal Pittore, per essere il Poeta e’] Pittore, come s’é detto, insieme quasi fratelli, ci rappresenta una sconvenevolissima inventione: il senso de i cui versi puo esser tale.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 123 TWENTY

Aret. Take Timanthes, one of the celebrated painters of antiquity. He did a painting of Iphigeneia, the daughter of Agamemnon, whom Euripides took as his subject in that fine tragedy of his—the one translated by Dolce and performed here in Venice a few years ago. Timanthes, I say, pictured her before the altar, at which she was waiting to be slaughtered as a sacrifice to Diana; and having varied the expressions on the faces of the bystanders to take in every aspect of grief, he did not trust his ability to make the grief on the face of the sorrowing father greater still. So he arranged for the father to cover

his face with a length of linen, or rather with the edge of his mantle. And in fact Timanthes was still, in this expedient of his, maintaining propriety very well. For since Agamemnon was the girl’s father, it was evident that it should have been insupportable for him to see the immolation of his daughter with his own eyes. Fab. This was a very fine example of true invention. Aret. Similarly Parrhasius, a renowned painter of that age, depicted two figures, so that the one who was the victorious contender appeared to be sweating, and the one who was disarming himself seemed to be panting. These two examples relating to artists of antiquity may serve to demonstrate how important invention is for a painter—since from it there derive, or rather with it there go, all the beautiful constituents of draftsmanship. Later on I shall not neglect to give an example here from the painters of modern times. Again, the painter must conceive sites and buildings which tie in with the characteristics of the countries in question. In this way he will avoid attributes which are proper to a different context from his particular one. Thus there was no great perspicacity in the painter who, in depicting Moses as he struck the rock with his rod and made the water which the Hebrews desired miraculously pour out of it, showed a fertile, grassy landscape, encircled by pleasant little slopes; first, because the narrative establishes that this miracle took place in the desert, and second, because in fertile regions there is always plenty of water. Fab. Certainly the painter needs to possess a well-developed intelligence, and never to nod for an instant over invention. Notice the nice touch by Horace at the beginning of his Ars Poetica, addressed to the brothers Piso. He wants, in effect, to speak of invention. So he takes up the analogy of the painter—the point being, as we have said, that the relation between the poet and the painter is almost brotherly—and puts before us a really incongruous invention. The drift of his lines goes like this:

124 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWENTY-ONE

Se collo di cavallo a capo humano Alcun Pittor per suo capriccio aggiunga, Quello di varie piume ricoprendo: E porga al corpo suo forma si strana, Che fra diverse qualita di membra Habbia la coda di difforme pesce, E la testa accompagni un dolce aspetto Di vaga e leggiadrissima Donzella: A veder cosa tal, sendo chiamati, Potreste amici ritener il riso?

Aret. E questo al mio parere dinota, che in tutto il contenimento della historia, laquale abbracci molte figure, si faccia un corpo, che non discordi: come sarebbe, se io havessi a dipingere il piover della manna nel deserto, dovrei fare, che tutti gli Hebrei, che in tal cosa si vanno rapresentando, con varie attitudini raccogliessero questo cibo celeste, dimostrando allegrezza e disiderio grandissimo, in guisa, che non paresse, che alcuno si stesse in darno: come si vede nelle carta di Rafaello: ilquale oltre cio si ha imaginato un deserto vero con casamenti di legnami convenienti al tempo & al luogo; e dato a Mose

effigie grave, vestendolo di habito lungo, & hallo fatto di statura grande et augusta, dando insino alle Giudee vesti con raccami, si come elle usavano. Ne debbo tacere, poi che non si dee tacere la verita, che intorno alla historia colui, che dipinse nella sala detta di sopra, appresso il quadro della battaglia dipinta da Titiano, la historia della scomunica, fatta da Papa Alessandro a Federico Barbarossa Imperadore, havendo nella sua inventione rappresentata Roma, usci al mio parere sconciamente fuori della convenevolezza a farvi dentro que’ tanti Senatori Vinitiani, che fuor di proposito stanno a vedere: conciosia cosa, che non ha del verisimile, che essi cosi tutti a un tempo vi si trovassero: ne hanno punto da far con la historia. Servé bene (e divinamente) all’incontro la convenevolezza Titiano nel guadro, ove il detto Federico s’inchina & humilia innanzi il Papa, baciandogli il santo piede: havendovi dipinto guidiciosamente il Bembo, il Navagero, & il Gannazaro: che riguardano. Percioche quantunque I’avenimento di questa cosa fosse molti anni a dietro, i primi due sono imaginati

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 125 TWENTY-ONE

Suppose some painter out of whim was led To join a horse’s neck to a human head, Use feathers of all kinds as overlay And form the body in so strange a way That while each member was a curio And a crude fish supplied the tail below The tender look appearing on the face Belonged to a young girl of charm and grace, If you, my friends, were summoned by this hack To come and see, could you keep laughter back?

Aret. And this in my view indicates that, across the whole span of a historical subject which entails many figures, one should produce a collective whole which is not inharmonious. Suppose, for example, that I had to paint the fall of manna in the desert. I would have to arrange that all of the Jews who figured in such an enterprise were gathering up this heavenly food in a variety of poses. They would need to display lightness of heart and an extreme eagerness, in such a way that one had no impression that any one of them was still a needy case. This is what one sees in the cartoon by Raphael. Furthermore Raphael has imaginatively put in a real desert with tenements of timber appropriate to the time and place. He has given Moses a solemn expression, dressed him in a long robe and made him tall and majestic in stature; he has even clothed the Jewish women in embroidered costumes of the type they used to wear. And since the truth ought not to be hushed up, I should not refrain from saying that, as regards historical subject matter, the man who painted in the Sala I mentioned before, next to Titian’s battle picture, the history of the excommunication of the Emperor Federico Barbarossa by Pope Alexander, and included in his invention a representation of Rome, exceeded the bounds of propriety in a serious way—in my opinion—when he put in so many Venetian senators, and showed them standing there and looking on without any real motivation. For the fact is that there is no likelihood that all of them should have happened to be there simultaneously in quite this way, nor do they have anything to do with the subject. Titian, on the other hand, respected propriety suitably (and divinely too) in the painting which shows the same Federico bowing down and humbling himself before the Pope, whose sacred foot he kisses. He judiciously depicted Bembo, Navagero and Sannazaro as spectators. For although many years had passed since the event in question, the first two are repre-

126 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWENTY-TWO

in Vinegia patria loro; & non é lontano dal vero, che’l terzo vi sia stato. Senza che non era disconvenevole, che uno de’ primi Pittori del mondo lasciasse nelle sue publiche opere

memoria dell’aspetto de’ tre primi Poeti e dotti huomini della nostra eta: due de’ quali erano gentilhuomini Vinitiani, e l’altro fu tanto affettionato a questa nobilissima Citta di Vinegia, che in un suo Epigramma l’antepose a Roma. L’epigramma ridotto nella lingua nostra e questo. Vedendo la Citta d’ Adria Nettuno Gloriosa sedersi in mezo a l’onde, E porre a tutto’l Mar legge & impero: Giove, quanto a te par (stupendo disse) Del gran Monte Tarpeo ti gloria e vanta, E le mura di Marte apprezza e loda. Se inanzi al Mare il tuo bel Tebro poni, L’una e Valtra Citta riguarda e mira: E si dirai tu poi: Quella hebbe forma Gia per le man de gli huomini mortali: Ma questa fabricar glieterni Dei.

Il medesimo epigramma fu leggiadramente tradotto in un Sonetto dal virtuosissimo giovane Mi. Giovan Mario Verdezotto: ilquale molto di Pittura dilettandosi, l’accompagna con le lettere, alle volte ancora egli disegnando e dipingendo. [Fab.] Sono cotali lode nel vero grandi; ma degne di questa Citta. [Aret.] Ora presuppongasi, che questo huomo da bene in cio non sia punto mancato di giudicio (che certo, quando quella inventione non meriti laude per altro; si lo merita ella per la dignita di que’ rari Signori, che rappresenta: essendo, che le imagini spesse volte si riveriscono per la effigie di coloro, che elle contengono, se ben sono di mano di cattivi Maestri) mostro di haver bene havuto poca consideratione alhora, ch’ei dipinse la Santa Margherita a cavallo del Serpente.

Fab. Io niuna di queste opere ho veduto. Ma della inventione parmi havere udito assai. Passate al disegno. Aret. Ho da dire ancora d’intorno alla materia della inventione alquante parole: come, che ogni figura faccia bene la sua operatione. Onde se una siede, paia, che ella sieda commodamente: se sta in piede, fermi le piante de’ piedi in guisa, che non paia, che trabbocchi: e se ella si muove,

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 127 TWENTY-TWO

sented in their homeland, Venice, and the presence there of the third man represents no great departure from the truth. It was not inappropriate, furthermore, that one of the world’s foremost painters should bequeath, in his public works, a record of the appearance of the three leading poets and men of learning of our age. For two of the latter were Venetian noblemen, and the third was so devoted to this city of Venice in all its nobility that in one of his epigrams he even gives it precedence over Rome. Here is a translation of his lines: Glorious city of Venice! When Neptune saw How she stood in the water, exercising law Over the whole Adriatic, “Jove,” he cried, “Boast of your Martian walls and your mountainside At will. But if the Tiber makes your heart burn More than this sea, study each city in turn. Then you will say, acknowledging the odds: Great men built Rome, but Venice was built by Gods.”

This same epigram was gracefully converted into a sonnet by that very brilliant young man, Messer Giovanni Mario Verdezotto, who finds great pleasure in painting, side by side with literature, and on occasion even draws and paints. Fab. Such terms of praise are pitched really high: but they are on a level worthy of this city. Aret. Suppose we assume for the moment that this well-thought-of man showed no failure of judgment here at all. (One thing is sure: This invention of his deserves praise—if on no other grounds—for the nobility of those exceptional lords who appear in it; the fact is, indeed, that representations are very often revered because of the people they include in portrait form, even if they are the work of poor masters.) There is still another case, where he failed to demonstrate any real care: his depiction of St. Margaret riding on the serpent. Fab. I have not seen any of these works. But I feel that I have heard enough about invention. Go on to design.

Aret. I have still a few words to say on the subject of invention. Every figure, for instance, should perform well the action it is engaged in. Thus, if a particular figure is seated, it should appear to be sitting comfortably; if it is standing up, the soles of its feet should be weighed down in such a way that it does not appear to fall over; and if it is in motion,

128 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWENTY-THREE

sia il movimento facile, e con le circostanze, che toccherd piu avanti. Et é impossibile,

che’l Pittore possegga bene le parti, che convengono alla inventione, si per conto della historia, come della convenevolezza, se non é pratico delle historie e delle favole de’ Poeti. Onde si come é di grande utile a un letterato per le cose, che appartengono all’ufficio dello scrivere, il saper disegnare: cosi ancora sarebbe di molto beneficio alla profession del Pittore il saper lettere. Ma non essendo il Pittor letterato, sia almeno intendente, come io dico, delle historie, e delle Poesie, tenendo pratica di Poeti, e d’huomini dotti. Voglio ancora avertire, che quando il Pittore va tentando ne’ primi schizzi le fantasie, che genera nella sua mente la historia, non si dee contentar d’una sola, ma trovar piu inventioni, e poi fare iscelta di quella, che meglio riesce, considerando tutte le cose insieme, e ciascuna separatamente: come soleva il medesimo Rafaello: ilquale fu tanto ricco d’inventione, che faceva sempre a quattro e sei modi, differenti l’uno dall’altro,

una historia, e tutti havevano gratia, e stavano bene. E guardi sopra tutto il Pittore di non incorrer nel vitio di colui, che havendo cominciato a fare un bel vaso, lo fa riuscire in una scodella, o in altra cosa simile di vile e picciolo prezzo. Questo dico: perche aviene spesso, che’l Pittore si havra imaginata alcuna bella inventione, ne riuscira poi in rappre-

sentarla per debolezza delle sue forze. Onde dovra lasciarla, e prenderne un‘altra, che possa condur bene, in tanto, ch’e’ non sia sforzato di far quello, che non era sua intentione. Fab. E questo aviene medesimamente a noi altri, che per poverta di parole spesse volte siamo astretti a scriver cosa, che non havevamo nel pensiero. Aret. Per quello, che s’é detto, appare, che la inventione vien da due parti, dalla historia, e dall’ingegno del Pittore. Dalla historia egli ha semplicemente la materia. E dall’ingegno oltre

all’ordine e la convenevolezza, procedono I’attitudini, la varieta, e la (per cosi dire) energia delle figure. ma questa e parte commune col disegno. Basta a dire, che in niuna parte di questa inventione il Pittore sia ocioso: e non elegga piu, che un numero convenevole di figure, considerando, che egli le rappresenta all’ occhio del riguardante: ilquale confuso

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 129 TWENTY-THREE

its movement should be easy, and circumstantially backed up in ways that I shall touch on later. Again, the painter cannot possibly be in strong command of the elements which relate to invention—as regards both subject matter or propriety—unless he is versed in historical narrative and the tales of the poets. Hence, just as the ability to make designs is extremely useful to a man of letters in those matters which relate to the business of writing, so too in the painter’s profession a knowledge of letters can prove most beneficial. The painter may not in fact be a man of letters; but let him at least, as I say, be versed in historical narrative and poetry, and keep in close touch with poets and men of learning.

I would also like to warn the painter not to be satisfied with a single invention when it comes to his trying out in preliminary sketches the imaginative ideas inspired in his mind by the subject matter, but to evolve several of these and then pick out the one which succeeds best, taking into account both the collective whole and the individual parts. Raphael again used to do this, a man so rich in inventiveness that he was always working out a narrative composition in four or six different ways, all of which were attractive and well set up. And above all the painter should take care to keep himself free of that iniguity which leads a man to start out with a beautiful vase in mind, but succeed only in

producing a porringer, or something that is equally cheap and valueless. I say this because it often happens that the painter may have thought up a fine invention: but, because he is weak where he should be strong, he will then be unable to realize it successfully. In that case he should abandon the idea and take up another which he can handle properly, so that there is no pressure on him to produce something which is different from what he intended. Fab. Others like myself find this same thing happening when poverty of language constrains us into writing something which was not in our thoughts originally. Aret. It is evident from what has been said that invention originates from two quarters, the subject matter and the painter’s intellect. Subject matter simply supplies the painter with his material. From his intellect, over and above the elements of disposition and propriety, there come the poses, the variety, and again (so to speak) the dynamism of the figures— although this last links up with the matter of design. It is enough to say that the painter should avoid being slipshod in any of these areas which come under invention. He should not select more than an appropriate number of figures, bearing in mind how the target of his representation is the spectator’s eye, which finds annoyance in the confusion

a 130 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

TWENTY-FOUR

dalla troppa moltitudine s’infastidisce; ne é verisimile, che in un tempo gli si appresentino inanzi tante cose.

Fab. Cosi vogliono i guidiciosi, che si dia al Poema; e massimamente alle Comedie et alle Tragedie; una lunghezza mediocre, adducendo per ragione, che se una cosa animata é

troppo grande, é abhorrita: se troppo picciola, vien dileggiata. Aret. E perche habbiamo ristretto il Pittore sotto queste leggi, si dell’ordine, come della convenevolezza: non é che alle volte egli, come il Poeta, non possa prendersi qualche licenza, ma tale, che non trabbocchi nel vitio. Che non ista bene, che si accoppino insieme le cose piacevoli, con le fiere: come i Serpenti con gli Ucelli, e gli Agnelli con le Tigri. Ma vengo al disegno. Il disegno, come ho detto, é la forma, che da il Pittore alle cose, che va imitando: & e proprio un giramento di linee per diverse vie, lequali formano le figure. Ove bisogna, che’l Pittore ponga ogni cura, e sparga del continovo ogni suo sudore: percioche una brutta forma toglie ogni laude a qual si voglia bellissima inventione: ne basta a un Pittore di esser bello inventore, se non é parimente buon disegnatore: percioche la inventione si appresenta per la forma; e la forma non é altro, che disegno. Deve adunque il Pittore procacciar non solo d’imitar, ma di superar la Natura. Dico superar la Natura in una parte: che nel resto @ miracoloso, non pur, se vi arriva, ma quando vi si avicina. Questo é in dimostrar col mezo dell’ arte in un corpo solo tutta quella perfettion di bellezza, che la natura non suol dimostrare a pena in mille. Perche non si trova un corpo humano cosi perfettamente bello, che non gli manchi alcuna parte. Onde habbiamo lo esempio di Zeusi; che havendo a dipingere Helena nel Tempio de’ Crotoniati, elesse di vedere ignude cingue fanciulle: e togliendo quelle parti di bello dall’una, che mancavano all’altra, ridusse la sua Helena a tanta perfettione, che ancora ne resta viva la fama. Ilche puo anco servire per ammonitione alla temerita di coloro, che fanno tutte le lor cose di pratica. Ma, se vogliono i Pittori senza fatica trovare un perfetto esempio di bella Donna, leggano quelle Stanze dell’Ariosto, nelle quali egli discrive mirabilmente le bellezze della

Fata Alcina: e vedranno parimente, quanto i buoni Poeti siano ancora essi Pittori. le

Stanze (che io le ho conservate sempre, come Gioie bellissime, nel thesoro della memoria) sono queste.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 131 TWENTY-FOUR

of too large a cast, and how it is unlikely that such a wealth of things should confront us at any given moment. Fab. Men of judgment similarly like a piece of poetry to be of moderate length, and particu-

larly comedies and tragedies. The reason they give is that if an animate object is too large, it is loathed; if it is too small, it comes in for mockery. Aret. And because we have imposed on the painter these restrictive laws of disposition on the one hand and propriety on the other, this does not mean that he, like the poet, may not on occasion take certain liberties—always assuming he does not fall into iniquity. For it is not right that pleasant and severe things should go hand in hand—snakes with birds, for example, and lambs with tigers. But this brings me to design. Design, as I said earlier, is the form imparted by the painter to the things which he sets about imitating; and it is really a winding movement of lines, which travel along various paths to give shape to the figures. Hence the painter needs to bring all his attention to bear and to expend all of his energies from start to finish, since an ugly form strips an invention of all its merit, however beautiful it may be. Nor is it enough for a painter to be a fine inventor, if he is not equally good as a designer; for invention puts itself across through form, and form is identical with design. So the painter should try not only to imitate nature, but to surpass it. ] am speaking of surpassing nature in one respect—as far as the rest go, it is miraculous that he should ever come close to his goal, not to mention his actually attaining it. And this is in displaying within a single human body, by dint of art, that entire perfection of beauty which nature barely exhibits in a thousand bodies. For there is no human body so perfectly beautiful that it is not wanting in some respect. Hence the precedent furnished for us by Zeuxis, who, called upon to do a painting of Helen for the Temple of the Crotonians, chose to study five young girls in the nude. And by supplying from one of these the beautiful parts that were missing in another, he brought his Helen to such a pitch of perfection that the fame of the work still lives on. This story can also serve as a warning against the rashness of those who base all their work upon direct experience. If, however, painters want to find without effort a perfect example of feminine loveliness, they should read those stanzas in which Ariosto describes quite marvellously the beauties of the Enchantress Alcina, and they too will come to realize the degree to which good poets are also painters themselves. The verses are these—I have always kept them in the treasure-house of my memory, as jewels of great beauty:

132 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWENTY-FIVE

Di persona era tanto ben formata, Quanto me’ finger san Pittori industri. Ecco, che, quanto alla proportione, l‘ingeniosissimo Ariosto assegna la migliore, che sappiano formar le mani de’ piu eccellenti Pittori, usando questa voce industri, per dinotar la diligenza, che conviene al buono artefice. Con bionda chioma lunga, & annodata: Oro non é, che piu risplenda e lustri.

Poteva l’Ariosto nella guisa, che ha detto chioma bionda, dir chioma d’oro: ma gli parve

forse, che havrebbe havuto troppo del Poetico. Da che si puo ritrar, che’l Pittore dee imitar l’oro, e non metterlo (come fanno i Miniatori) nelle sue Pitture, in modo, che si possa dire, que’ capelli non sono d’oro, ma par che risplendano, come I’oro: ilche se ben non é cosa degna di avertimento, pur piacemi haverla tocca. Et a questo proposito ricordomi haver letto in Atheneo: che, quantunque si legga ne’ Poeti, Apollo con questo aggiunto di auricomo: che (come sapete) vuol dire chioma d’oro, non dee un Pittore, dipingendo la imagine di Apollo, farlo co’ capelli di oro, ne molto meno di color nero, che sarebbe maggior fallo: volendo inferire, che l’ufficio del Pittore é d’imitare il proprio di qualunque cosa con le distintioni, che si convengono. Spargeasi per la guancia delicata Misto color di rose e di ligustri.

Qui I’Ariosto colorisce, & in questo suo colorire dimostra essere un Titiano. Ma non é hora da parlare di questa parte. Segue adunque. Di terso avorio era la fronte lieta, Che lo spatio finia con giusta meta.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 133 TWENTY-FIVE

The shape of her figure matched, before one’s eyes, The best industrious painters can devise.

Notice Ariosto’s extreme intelligence in assigning to his figure, where proportion is concerned, the highest level of quality that the hands of the most outstanding painters are capable of producing; and his use of this word “industrious” to denote the diligence which the good craftsman should properly display. Her long blond hair was knotted—there could be No gold which gleamed with greater radiancy.

Ariosto could well have written “golden hair,” instead of saying “blond hair” in the way he did; but perhaps he thought that this expression would have had too poetic a ring.

One can deduce from this that a painter ought to imitate gold, and not (as miniature painters do) actually include it in his pictures—thereby enabling one to say that, while this hair of his is not made of gold, its shine does give it the appearance of gold. This may not be a point worth noticing, but I am pleased all the same to have touched on it. And I remember in this connection having read in Athenaeus that, although one finds the poets attaching to Apollo the epithet auricomus—which means (as you know) golden-haired—an artist who is painting the likeness of Apollo should not use gold for his hair; still less should he color it black, for that would be a worse mistake. The inference would then be that the painter’s function consists in imitating, with the appropriate distinctions, the inherent character of any object there may be. Over her delicate cheek there spread its way A color blended out of rose and may.

Here Ariosto puts in the coloring, and shows himself to be a Titian in the way he does this. But now is not the time to discuss this element. Next, then, comes this: A forehead of burnished ivory gladdened her face, Ending its span in just the proper place.

a 134 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

TWENTY-SIX

& aggiunge.

Sotto duo negri e sottilissimi archi Son duo negr’occhi, anzi duo chiari Soli, Pietosi a riguardar, a mover parchi, Intorno a cui par, ch’Amor scherzi e voli, E ch’indi tutta la Faretra scharchi, E che visibilmente i cori involi: Quindi il naso per mezo il viso scende, Che non trova l’invidia, ove lo emende.

Dipinge gliocchi neri; le ciglia similmente nere e sottilissime; il naso, che discende giu, havendo peraventura la consideratione a quelle forme de’ nasi, che si veggono ne’ ritratti delle belle Romane antiche. Le altre Stanze seguird senza punto interromperle. Bianca neve é il bel collo, e’l petto latte, Il collo é tondo, il petto colmo e largo:

Due pome acerbe e pur d’avorio fatte Vengono e van, come onda al primo margo, Quando piacevol’aura il mar combatte. Non potria l'altre parti veder Argo. Ben si puo giudicar, che corrisponde A quel, ch’appar di fuor, quel, che s’asconde. Mostra le braccia sua misura giusta, E la candida man spesso si vede, Lunghetta alquanto, e di larghezza angusta: Dove ne nodo appar, ne vena eccede. Si vede al fin de la persona augusta Il breve, asciutto, e ritondetto piede. Gli angelici sembianti nati in Cielo Non si ponno celar sotto alcun velo.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 135 TWENTY-SIX

And Ariosto goes on: Beneath twin eyebrows which were fine and jet Like two bright sun-disks, two black eyes were set, Tenderly gazing, disinclined to move, One felt that round them flew that prankster, Love, With quiver filled; soon he would fire his darts And steal away, for all to see, men’s hearts. Then in mid-channel came the nose’s range Where even envy found no cause for change.

He paints the eyes black, and similarly makes the eyebrows black and very fine. As for the descent of the nose, he may well have been thinking here of the types of nose one sees in antique portraits of beautiful Roman ladies. I will run through the remaining stanzas without breaking in at all. The breasts milk-white, the neck as white as snow; Round neck, broad and full bosom. There’d come and go Two unripe apples made of ivory Like the waves upon the shore line, when the sea Finds some sweet breeze disputing its behest. Not even Argus could have seen the rest. But one could judge that what was not disclosed Was well in keeping with the parts exposed. The arms’ proportions were as they should be, And a white hand was visible frequently, Narrow in span, yet rather long; it showed No veins protruding, not the smallest node. Last, where this lordly body met the ground One saw a foot which was dry, compact and round. Angelic, heaven-born features do not ask To be concealed; no veil could do this task.

a 136 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

TWENTY-SEVEN

Quivi adunque entra una gran fatica. che quantunque la bellezza sia riposta nella proportione; questa proportione e diversa: percioche la Natura varia non meno nelle stature de glihuomini, che nelle effigie, e ne’ corpi. Onde alcuni se ne veggono grandi, altri piccioli, altri mezani: altri carnosi, altri magri, altri delicati, atri muscolosi e robusti. Fab. Mi sarebbe grato, Signor Pietro, che qui mi deste qualche regola della misura del corpo humano. Aret. Farollo volentieri, parendomi gran vergogna, che l’huomo ponga tanto studio in misurar la terra, il mare, et i cieli, e non sappia la misura di se stesso. Dico adunque, che havendo

la prudente Natura formata la testa dell’huomo, come rocca principale di tutta questa mirabil fabrica, ch’é chiamata picciol mondo, nella piu elevata parte del corpo, tutte le parti di esso corpo debbono convenevolmente prender da lei la loro misura. Dividesi la testa, o diciamo faccia in tre parti: l’una dalla sommita della fronte, dove nascono i capegli, insino alle ciglia: l’altra dalle ciglia insino alla estremita delle narigie: l’ultima dalle narigie insino al mento. La prima é tenuta seggio della sapienza: la seconda della bellezza: e la terza della bonta. Dieci adunque teste, secondo alcuni, forniscono il corpo humano: e secondo altri nove, & otto, & anco sette. Scrivono Autori celebratissimi, che e’ non puo crescere in lunghezza piu, che sette piedi: e la misura del piede sono sedici dita. La misura del mezo della lunghezza si piglia dal membro genitale: e il centro del medesimo corpo humano é naturalmente l’ombilico. Onde ponendosi |’huomo con le braccia distese, e tirando linee dall’ombilico insino alla estremita de’ piedi, e delle dita

delle mani, fa un cerchio perfetto. Le ciglia giunte insieme formano ambedue i cerchi de gli occhi. i semicircoli delle orecchie debbono esser, quanto é la bocca aperta: la larghezza del naso sopra la bocca, quanto é lungo un’occhio. II naso si forma dalla lunghezza del

labro; e tanto é un’occhio lontano dall’altro, quanto é lungo esso occhio: e tanto la

orecchia dal naso, quanto é lungo il dito di mezo della mano. Poi la mano vuole esser, quanto é il volto. Il braccio é due volte e mezo grosso [quanto é il dito grosso], cioe dalla parte, che finisce, ove ha principio la mano. E la coscia é grossa una volta e meza, come il braccio, pigliando di quello la parte piu grossa. Diro la lunghezza piu

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 137 TWENTY-SEVEN

At this point, then, a serious problem introduces itself. For all, that is, that beauty is to be found in proportion, this proportion has its own diversity. For nature shows variation in the height of human beings just as much as it does in their faces and bodies. Consequently some of the people one sees are tall, and others short or medium-sized; some are corpulent and others thin; some delicate and others muscular and robust. Fab. I would be grateful, sir, if you would provide me at this point with some canon of proportion for the human body. Aret. I will willingly do this, for it seems to me highly shameful that man should devote so much attention to measuring out the earth, the sea and the heavens and yet remain unaware of his own measurements. Let me say then that nature in its wisdom has formed the human head so that it should stand at the very top of the body, as the cornerstone of that whole remarkable structure which is known as the “microcosm.” Consequently all the other parts of this same body should suitably derive their own proportions from it. The head—or let us say the face—divides into three parts. The first of these runs from the top of the forehead, where the hair begins, as far as the eyebrows; the second from the eyebrows down to the tip of the nostrils; and the third from the nostrils down to the chin. These three segments are considered to be the seats of wisdom, beauty and goodness respectively. According to some authorities, therefore, ten heads make up the human body; according to others, nine, eight or even seven. Very well-known authors write maintaining that the body cannot grow to a length of more than seven feet, and that the foot measures sixteen digits. Measurement of half the total length is taken from the genitals. And the center of this same human body is naturally the navel. So if a man takes up a position with his arms outstretched, one can draw lines extending from the navel out to the tips of the feet and the fingers of the hands, and a perfect circle will be made. The eyebrows joined together form between them a circle around each of the eyes; the semicircles of the ears should be the same size as the open mouth; and the width of the nose above the mouth should correspond to the length of one eye. The nose takes its size from the length of the lip; the distance between the eyes is the same as the length of the eye itself; and the distance between the ear and the nose corresponds to the length of the middle finger of the hand. The hand, in turn, should be as large as the face. The arm is two and a half times as thick as the finger (this applies, that is, to the part that ends where the hand begins), and the thigh is one and a half times as thick as the arm (when one takes the thicker part of the latter). I will explain what is preeminent about

138 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento TWENTY-EIGHT

distinta. Dalla sommita del capo insino alla punta del naso si fa una faccia: e da questa punta insino alla sommita del petto, che é l’osso forcolare, si fa la seconda: e dalla sommita del petto insino alla bocca dello stomaco v’ha la terza: da quella insino all’ombilico si contiene la quarta; e insino a membri genitali la quinta: che é apunto la meta del corpo, lasciando da parte il capo. D’indi in poi la coscia insino al ginocchio contien due faccie, e dal ginocchio alla pianta de’ piedi contengonvisi le altre tre. Le braccia in lunghezza sono tre faccie, cominciando dal legamento della spalla insino alla giuntura della mano. La distanza, ch’é dal calcagno al collo del piede, é¢ dal medesimo collo insino alle estremita delle dita. E la grossezza dell’huomo cingendolo sotto le braccia, é giusto la meta della lunghezza. Fab. Queste misure molto importano a chi vuol fare una figura proportionata. Aret. Devesi adunque elegger la forma piu perfetta, imitando parte la Natura. IIche faceva Apelle: ilquale ritrasse la sua tanto celebrata Venere, che usciva dal Mare (di cui disse Ovidio, che se Apelle non I’havesse dipinta, ella sarebbe sempre stata sommersa fra le onde) da Frine, famosissima cortigiana della sua eta; & ancora Prasitele cavo la bella statua della sua Venere Gnidia dalla medesima giovane. E parte si debbono imitar le belle figure di marmo, o di bronzo de’ Maestri antichi. La mirabile perfettion delleguali chi eustera e possedera a pieno, potra sicuramente corregger molti diffetti di essa Natura, e far le sue Pitture riguardevoli e grate a ciascuno: percioche le cose antiche contengono tutta la perfettion dell’arte, e possono essere esemplari di tutto il bello. Fab. £E ben dritto, che havendo gliantichi, cosi Greci, come Latini, havuta la maggioranza nelle lettere, ’habbiano similmente ottenuta in queste due arte, cioe Pittura e Scultura, lequali molto piu al pregio loro si avicinano. Aret. Essendo adungue il principal fondamento del disegno la proportione, chi questa meglio osservera, sia in esso miglior Maestro. E per fare un corpo perfetto, oltre alla imitatione ordinaria della Natura, essendo anco mestiero d’imitar gliantichi, e da sapere, che questa ‘mitatione vuole esser fatta con buon giudicio, di modo, che credendo noi imitar le parti buone, non imitiamo le cattive.

ee

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 139 TWENTY-EIGHT

length. The distance between the top of the head and the tip of the nose makes up one “face.” The second such unit then runs from the tip of the nose to the top of the chest, which is marked by the collar bone; and the third from the top of the chest to the mouth of the stomach. The distance from here to the navel comprises the fourth unit, and the fifth runs down to the genitals—which exactly mark the center of the body, assuming that one leaves out the head. From there on the distance from thigh to knee consists of two units, and the distance between the knee and the sole of the foot comprises the remaining three. The arms are three units long, if one begins from the ligament of the shoulder and goes as far as the joint of the hand. The interval between the heel and the instep is repeated between this same instep and the tips of the toes. Lastly, the diameter of a man taken beneath the armpits is exactly half of his length. Fab. These measurements are of great importance to anyone who wants to produce a wellproportioned figure.

Aret. So the form one chooses should be the most perfect there can be, and one’s imitation of nature only partial. This is how Apelles worked when portraying that Venus Anadyomene of his which was so celebrated (Ovid said of the picture that if Apelles had not painted Venus, she would have remained for ever submerged amongst the waves). He based his figure on Phryne, the most notorious courtesan of his time. And Praxiteles used this same young woman also when sculpting his lovely statue of the Cnidian Venus. In part also one should imitate the lovely marble or bronze works by the ancient masters. Indeed, the man who savors their incredible perfection and fully makes it his own will confidently be able to correct many defects in nature itself, and make his paintings noteworthy and pleasing to everyone. For antique objects embody complete artistic perfection, and may serve as exemplars for the whole of beauty. Fab. One is quite right in saying that when the men of antiquity—both Greek and Roman— had attained preeminence in literature, they set about attaining it to the same degree in these two arts—namely, painting and sculpture—which actually come far closer to their esteem.

Aret. Proportion, then, is the main foundation of design, and the better a man observes its laws, the better a master in this respect he will be. And for the execution of a perfect body, above and beyond the ordinary imitation of nature, it is also necessary to imitate the ancients and to recognize that this imitation calls for good judgment in the process, so that we do not reproduce the bad sections under the delusion that they are the good

a 140 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

TWENTY-NINE

Come veggendo, che gli antichi facevano le lor figure per lo piu svelte, v’é stato alcun Pittore, che serbando sempre questo costume, @ spesso trappassato nel troppo; e quello, ch’era virtu, ha fatto divenir vitio. Altri si sono messi a fare alle teste, (massimamente delle donne) il collo lungo; tra, perche hanno veduto per la maggior parte nelle imagini delle antiche Romane i colli lunghi, e perche i corti non hanno gratia: ma sono ancora essi passati nel troppo, e la piacevolezza hanno rivolta in disgratia. Fab. Questi per certo sono utili avertimenti. Aret. Ora habbiamo a considerar l/huomo in due modi, cioé nudo e vestito. Se lo formiamo nudo, lo possiamo far di due maniere: cioé o pieno di muscoli, o delicato: laqual delicatezza da Pittori ¢ chiamata dolcezza. E quivi ancora é mestiero, che si serbi la convenevolezza, che habbiamo data alla inventione. Percioche, se il Pittore ha da far Sansone, non

gli dee attribuir morbidezza e delicatezza da Ganimede: ne se ha da far Ganimede, dee ricercare in lui nervi e robustita da Sansone. Cosi ancora, se dipinge un putto, dee dareli membri da putto; ne dee fare un vecchio con sentimenti da giovane, ne un giovane con que’ da fanciullo. Il simile €é convenevole, che si osservi in una Donna, distinguendo sesso

da sesso, & eta da eta, e dando a ciascuno convenientemente le parti sue. Ne solo in diverse qualita di figure convengono diverse persone & aspetti; ma anco le medesime le piu

volte si vanno variando: percioche altrimenti si formera Cesare, rappresentandolo, quando era Consolo; altrimenti, quando era Capitano, & altrimenti: quando era Imperadore. Cosi nel fare Hercole, il Pittore se lo imaginera in un modo combattendo con Antheo, in altro portando il cielo, in altro, quando abbraccia Deianira, & in altro, mentre egli va cercando il suo Hila. Pero tutti gliatti, e tutte le guise serberanno la convenevolezza di Hercole e di Cesare. E anco da avertire a non discordare in un corpo stesso, cioe a non fare una parte carnosa, e l’altra magra, una muscolosa, e I’altra delicata. E vero, che facendo la figura alcun’atto faticoso, o portando qualche peso, 0 movendo un braccio, o altra

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 141 TWENTY-NINE

ones. One knows, for example, of a certain painter who noticed that the ancients would, by and large, make their figures slender. By maintaining this habit invariably, he has overstepped the bounds of moderation on frequent occasions and turned into an iniquity what was initially a virtue. Others have made it their practice to put a long neck onto their heads—especially in the case of women. This comes from their having noticed that long necks occur more often than not in antique portraits of Roman ladies, and from the fact that short necks are graceless. But they too have gone too far, and turned what was pleasant into something disagreeable. Fab. These warnings of yours are certainly useful.

Aret. Now we need to consider the human figure in two senses: that is to say, nude and clothed. If we are realizing a nude figure, we can go about this in two different ways; that is, we can present it either as heavily musculated, or as delicate (and painters call this kind of delicacy “softness”). Here again one needs to observe the propriety which we made into a datum in the case of invention. For if the painter has to depict Samson, he should not attribute to him the softness and delicacy of Ganymede; nor, conversely, if he has to paint Ganymede, should he seek out in this case the sinews and robustness of Samson. By the same tokens once more, if he is painting a putto he should give him the limbs of a putto; nor should he make an old man exhibit the feelings of a youth, or a youth those of a small boy. He should similarly keep to what is proper in the case of a woman, distinguishing one sex from the other, making clear differences of age, and giving each figure its component parts in the proper way. It is not only in figures of differing quality that differences of personality and appearance are appropriate. Rather, more occasions than one also bring about variation within the selfsame figures. Thus Caesar will appear in one guise if one depicts him at the time of his consulate; in another if one shows him when he was military commander, and in still another if one shows him when he was emperor. Similarly, in depicting Hercules, the painter should conceive of him in different ways, according as to whether he is wrestling with Antaeus, supporting the sky, embracing Deanira, or going in search of his Hylas. Yet all patterns of action and all modes of representation should keep to what is proper for Hercules and Caesar

respectively. One should also take care to avoid disharmony within one and the same body: that is, one should not make one section of the body corpulent and the other thin, or one muscular and the other delicate. It is true that when the figure is performing some laborious action, or carrying some weight, or moving one of its arms, or doing something

a 142 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

THIRTY

cosa; in quella parte della fatica, del peso, e del movimento, é mestiero, che salti in fuori alcun muscolo molto piu, che non fa nelle riposate, ma non tanto, che disconvenga.

Fab. Poi, che havete diviso il nudo in muscoloso e delicato, vorrei, che mi diceste, qual di

questi due é piu da prezzarsi. Aret. Io stimo, che un corpo delicato debba anteporsi al muscoloso. e la ragione é questa, ch’é maggior fatica nell’arte a imitar le carni, che l’ossa: perche in quelle non ci va altro, che durezza, e in queste solo si contine la tenerezza, ch’é la piu difficil parte della Pittura, in tanto, che pochissimi Pittori l’hanno mai saputa esprimere, o la esprimono hoggidi nelle cose loro bastevolmente. Chi adunque va ricercando minutamente i muscoli, cerca ben di mostrar l’ossature a luoghi loro: ilche é lodevole: ma spesse volte fa I’‘huomo scorticato, o secco, o brutto da vedere: ma chi fa il delicato, accenna gliossi, ove bisogna, ma gli ricopre dolcemente di carne, e riempie il nudo di gratia. E se voi qui mi diceste, che ne’ ricercamenti de’ nudi si conosce, se il Pittore é intendente della Notomia, parte molto bisognevole al Pittore; perche senza le ossa non si puo formar ne vestir di carni l’huomo: vi rispondo, che’l medesimo si comprende ne gliaccennamenti e macature. E per conchiudere, oltre che all’occhio naturalmente aggradisce piu un nudo gentile e delicato, che un robusto e muscoloso, vi rimetto alle cose de gliantichi: iquali per lo piu hanno usato di far le lor figure delicatissime. Fab. La delicatezza delle membra piu appartiene alla Donna, che all’huomo.

Aret. (Questo e vero, e ve l’ho detto di sopra, facendo motto, che non bisogna confondere i sessi. Ma non é pero, che non si trovino moltissimi huomini delicati: come sono per lo piu i gentilhuomini, senza ch’e’ trappassino ne a conformita di Donna, ne di Ganimede. E vero, che alcuni Pittori danno alla loro ignoranza nome di delicatezza: percioche sono molti, che non sapendo la positura ne il collegamento de gliossi,

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 143 THIRTY

else of the same order, a certain muscle, in the section of the body affected by the labor, the weight or the movement, needs to bulge out far more than would be the case in figures which are in repose; but it should not do this, all the same, to the point of inappropriateness. Fab. Now that you have subdivided the nude into the muscular type and the delicate one, I] would like you to tell me which of these two is the more estimable. Aret. I think myself that a delicate body ought to take precedence over a muscular one. And the reason is that, in art, the flesh areas impose a more strenuous task of imitation than the bones do. For nothing goes into the latter except hardness, whereas only the flesh areas embody softness, the most refractory element in painting—so refractory, indeed, that the number of painters who have had it at their command in the past or give it satisfactory expression in their work today is very small indeed. So the man who practices a detailed elaboration of the muscles is really aiming to give an organized picture of the

bone structure, and this is commendable; often, however, he succeeds in making the human figure look flayed or desiccated or ugly. The man who works in the delicate manner, on the other hand, gives an indication of the bones where he needs to do so; but he covers them smoothly with flesh and charges the nude figure with grace. And if you tell

me at this point that the ways in which the painter elaborates his nudes enable one to recognize whether or not he has a good grasp of anatomy—a field of knowledge which plays a very necessary role with the artist, since without bone structure the human figure cannot be modeled nor clothed in flesh—I will reply that the suggestive indications and

the fleshy passages give one the same insight. And above and beyond the fact that a tender and delicate nude is naturally more pleasing to the eye than a robust and muscular one, let me refer you in conclusion to the works produced by the ancients, whose practice it was, by and large, to make their figures extremely delicate. Fab. Delicacy of physique is more endemic to the female figure than the male one.

Aret. That is true, and I made the point to you earlier, when I came out with the saying that there is no need to confuse the sexes. But one should not suppose on that account that delicate men are hard to find. Actually they exist in very large numbers; men of class, for instance, are mostly this way, without being so excessively delicate that they look like a woman or like Ganymede. It is true that some painters use the word “delicacy” as a cover-name for their ignorance.

There are many, that is, whose ignorance of the location and interconnection of the

a 144 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

THIRTY-ONE

non fanno o veruno, o pochissimo accennamento, dove essi stanno, ma con i principali d’intorni solamente conducono le loro figure. & all’incontro non pochi, iquali muscolandole e ricercandole di soverchio, e fuor di luogo, si danno a credere di essere in disegno

Michel’Agnoli, ove essi vengono dilegiati per goffi da coloro, che hanno giudicio:

percioche puo avenire, che alcun Pittore havra cavato o dall’antico o da qualche valente Pittor moderno (o sia Michel’Agnolo, o Rafaello, o Titiano, o altro) qualche parte buona, ma non sapendo metterla al suo luogo, ella riuscira disgratiatissima, come averrebbe a veder l’occhio, che é la piu bella e gratiosa parte del corpo, attaccato con una orecchia, o nel mezo della fronte: di tanta importanza e a poner le cose in luogo, o fuor di luogo. Fab. Bellissima similitudine. Aret. Seguita la varieta, laquale dee essere abbracciata dal Pittore; come parte tanto necessaria, che senza lei la bellezza e l’artificio divien satievole. Deve adunque il Pittore variar teste, mani, piedi, corpi, atti, e qualunque parte del corpo humano: considerando, che questa e la principal maraviglia della Natura; che in tante migliaia d’huomini, a pena due 0 po-

chissimi si trovano, che si assomiglino tra loro in modo, che non sia d’uno ad altro

grandissima differenza. Fab. Certo un Pittore, che non é vario, si puo dire, che non sia nulla. e questo e anco proprissimo del Poeta. Aret. Main tal parte é ancora da avertire di non incorrer nel troppo: percioche sono alcuni, che havendo dipinto un giovane, gli fanno allato un vecchio, o un fanciullo, e cosi accanto una giovane una vecchia: e parimente havendo fatto un volto in profilo, ne fanno un’altro in maesta, o con un’ occhio e mezo. Fab. Non intendo quello, che sia maesta, ne un’occhio e mezo. Aret. Chiamano i Pittori un volto in maesta, quando si fa tutta la faccia intera, che non gira piu ad una parte, che ad altra: e un’ occhio e mezo, quando il viso svolta in guisa, che si vede l’un de gliocchi intero, e l’altro non piu, che mezo: ma queste sono cose facili.

Fab. Jo non le sapeva.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 145 THIRTY-ONE

bones leads them to offer either no hint whatever or only the sketchiest hint of where these bones lie; instead, they rely on the most important contours and carry their figures through on this basis alone. And no small number, at the opposite extreme, delude themselves into believing that the fact that they put musculation on their figures and elaborate

the same to an excessive and inapposite degree makes them Michelangelos in their draftsmanship; whereas the upshot is that they and their clumsiness are held up to ridicule by those who possess discernment. Consider, that is, the case of a painter who has culled some worthwhile element from antiquity or from some capable modern artist (whether it be Michelangelo, Raphael, Titian or someone else again), but does not know how to place it where it belongs. There is an open possibility that it will come out completely compromised—as if one were seeing the eye, which is the loveliest and most appealing part of the body, fastened onto an ear or onto the middle of the forehead; for putting things in place or out of place is emphatically that important. Fab. A very splendid analogy. Aret. Next comes variety. The need for the painter to devote himself to its cause comes from its being so indispensable an element that without it beauty and artistry become cloying. Consequently the painter should diversify heads, hands, feet, bodies, actions and any and every part of the human frame—the foremost wonder of nature being, in his estimation, the fact that, amongst so many thousands of human beings, one is hard put to find two or any minimal number who exhibit mutual resemblance in such a way that the difference between one and another is not very considerable. Fab. Certainly a painter who shows no variety can be called a cipher; and the same also applies very strongly to the poet. Aret. Here again, however, one should take care not to go too far. For there are some people who, after painting a youth, put an old man or a young boy alongside him, and similarly put an old woman next to a young one. In the same way, too, they compose a face in profile and then another in full view or three-quarter view. Fab. I do not understand what is meant by “full view” or “three-quarter view.” Aret. Painters say that a face appears in “full view” when it is shown in its full entirety, with

no more of a slew to one side than the other; and in “three-quarter view” when it is turned in such a way that one can see the whole of one eye and no more than half of the other. But these are straightforward matters. Fab. They were unknown to me.

a 146 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

THIRTY-TWO

Aret. Se haveranno apresso fatto un’huomo volto in ischiena, ne faranno subito un/altro, che dimostri le parti dinanzi, e vanno sempre continuando un tale ordine. Questa varieta io non riprendo: ma dico, che essendo l’ufficio del Pittore d’imitar la Natura, non bisogna, che la varieta appaia studiosamente ricercata, ma fatta a caso. Perd dee uscir dell’ordine, & alle volte far due o tre d’una eta, d’un sesso, e d’un attitudine: pur che si dimostri vario ne’ volti, e varii le attitudine e i panni. Fab. A questo proposito si conformano molto questi versi del giudiciosissimo Horatio nella sua Poetica. Colui, che variar cerca una cosa Piu de l'honesto, fa, qual, chi dipinge Ne le selve il Delfino, e’l Porco in mare.

Aret. Resta a dire delle moventie, parte ancora ella necessarissima, & aggradevole, e di stupore: che aggradevole é nel vero, e fa stupir gliocchi de’ riguardanti, vedere in sasso, in tela, 0 in legno una cosa inanimata, che par, che si mova. Ma queste moventie non debbono esser continue, e in tutte le figure: perche gli huomini sempre non si movono: ne fiere si, che paiano da disperati: ma bisogna temperarle, variarle, & anco da parte lasciarle, secondo la diversita e condition de’ soggetti. E spesso é piu dilettevole un posar leggiadro, che un movimento sforzato e fuori di tempo. E mestiero ancora, che tutte facciano bene

(come ho detto parlando dell’inventione) lufficio loro, in modo, che se uno havra a tirare un colpo di spada, il movimento del braccio sia gagliardo, e la mano stringa il

manico, nella guisa, che conviene: e se alcuno corre, dimostri, che ogni parte del corpo serva al corso: e se é vestito, che’l vento ferisca ne’ panni verisimilmente: considerationi tutte importanti, e che non entrano nella mente de’ goffi. Fab. Chinon serba questo, bisogna, che lasci di dipingere.

Aret. Aviene anco, che le figure o tutte, o alcuna parte di esse scortino. Laqual cosa non si puo far senza gran giudicio e discretione.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 147 THIRTY-TWO

Aret. If, in the next place, they have composed a man with his back turned, they will at once introduce another who is frontally oriented, and so go on, maintaining an invariable sequence of this kind. I am not stricturing this form of diversification, but I am saying that, since the painter’s business is the imitation of nature, there is no call for variety to appear artificially elaborated—rather it should seem fortuitously brought into being. So the artist should break away from regularity, and at times introduce two or three figures that share the same age, sex and pose, always provided that he gives a show of variety on the faces and rings changes on the poses and draperies.

Fab. The following lines by Horace, that man of great perception, in his Ars Poetica tie in with this formulation of yours to a high degree: The poet who takes his leave of all restraints To vary some one thing, is virtually Following the example of the man who paints Dolphins in forests and wild boars at sea.

Aret. It remains to speak of movement. This again is a very necessary element, an agreeable one, and a source of astonishment. For it is genuinely pleasing and astonishing to the spectator’s eye to see in stone or on a canvas or in wood an inanimate object which gives the appearance of moving. But these movements ought not to be continuous and common to all of the figures, since human beings are not always in motion, or so violent that they look deranged; instead, this element needs to be handled with moderation and diversity, and even omitted on occasion, in line with the variety and circumstance of the subjects themselves. Often, too, a graceful pose is more pleasing than a forced and un-

timely activity. And again it is necessary that every movement should (as I remarked earlier when speaking of invention) discharge its function well. If, that is to say, a man is about to deliver a blow with his sword, the movement of his arm should be vigorous and his hand should grip the handle in the appropriate manner; if someone is running, he should give evidence that every part of his body is being used to propel him along; and if a man is dressed, the wind should blow through the clothing realistically. All of these are important considerations, which never enter the thoughts of uncouth fellows. Fab. The man who does not keep to this principle should be obliged to give up painting. Aret. Instances also occur where the figures are foreshortened, either totally or partially— something which cannot be done without great judgment and discretion. In my opinion,

148 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento THIRTY-THREE

Ma si debbono al mio parere gli scorti usar di rado: perche essi, quanto sono piu rari, tanto porgono maggior maraviglia: & alhora molto piu, quando il Pittore astretto dal luogo, per via di questi fa in picciol campo stare una gran figura: & anco gli puo usare alle volte per dimostrar, che gli sa fare. Fab. Ho inteso, che gli scorti sono una delle principali difficulta dell’arte. Onde io crederei, che chi piu spesso gli mettesse in opera, piu meritasse laude. Aret. Bisogna, che voi sappiate, che’l Pittore non dee procacciar laude da una parte sola, ma da

tutte quelle, che ricercano alla Pittura, e piu da quelle, che piu dilettano. Percioche essendo la Pittura trovata principalmente per dilettare, se’l Pittor non diletta, se ne sta oscuro e senza nome. E questo diletto non intendo io quello, che pasce gliocchi del volgo,

o anco de gl’‘intendenti la prima volta, ma quello, che cresce, quanto piu l’occhio di gualunque huomo ritorna a riguardare: come occorre ne’ buoni poemi: che quanto piu si leggono, tanto piu dilettano, e piu accrescono il desiderio nell’animo altrui di rileggere le cose lette. Gli scorti sono intesi da pochi. onde a pochi dilettano, & anco a gl’intendenti alle volte piu apportano fastidio, che dilettatione. Vuo ben dire, che, quando e’ sono ben fatti, ingannano la vista di chi mira, stimando spesso il riguardante, che quella parte, che non é lunga un palmo, sia a debita misura e proportione. Di qui leggiamo in Plinio, che Apelle dipinse Alessandro Magno nel Tempio di Diana Efesia con un folgore in mano: ove pareva, che le dita fossero rilevate, e che’l folgore uscisse della tavola. IIche non poteva Apelle haver finto, senon per via di scorti. Ma pure io son di parere, che per le cagioni dette essi non si vadano a bello studio sempre ricercando: anzi dico rade volte, per non turbare il diletto. Fab. Io, se fossi Pittore, gli userei non gia sempre, ma si bene spesse volte, stimando di doverne ritrar maggior honore, che, quando poche volte gli facessi.

Oe

Aret. Voi sete nato libero, e potreste operare a modo vostro: ma vi dico bene, che appresso altro ci vuole per esser buono e compiuto Pittore. Et una

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 149 THIRTY-THREE

however, foreshortenings should not be brought into use with any frequency. For the rarer they are, the greater the wonderment they occasion; and the more so when the painter, pressed for space, succeeds by dint of them in fitting a large figure into a small area. He can also use them, on occasion, to demonstrate his knowledge of this skill. Fab. I have been given to understand that foreshortenings constitute one of the leading problems in art. I should have thought, therefore, that the more often a man put them into operation, the more he would deserve praise.

Aret. You need to grasp the fact that the painter should not limit his pursuit of praise to one element alone, but extend it to every one of the elements which are involved in painting, and more especially those which afford the greater pleasure. Painting was invented primarily in order to give pleasure; by this token, then, if the artist fails to please, he remains unnoticed and devoid of reputation. And the pleasure in question is not, in my books, the one which gives sustenance to the eyes of the masses, nor even the one which connoisseurs experience on first encounter, but the one which increases, the more the eye of any sort of man undergoes a renewed exposure. This is what also happens in the case of good poems: the more they are read, the more they give pleasure and further increase,

within one’s spirit, the desire to re-read the passages in question. Because few people understand foreshortenings, few derive pleasure from them; and even with connoisseurs they prove at times more annoying than pleasing. What this really means is that when they are well carried out, they deceive the admirer’s sight. Often, that is, the spectator finds himself thinking that some element which measures less than a hand’s breadth has the length and proportion which it should by rights possess. Hence the passage in Pliny describing how, in the temple of Diana at Ephesus, Apelles painted Alexander the Great, thunderbolt in hand, and made it look as if the fingers were in relief and the thunderbolt were projecting out of the picture. Apelles could not have achieved this illusion except by dint of foreshortenings. But I still consider that, for the reasons I gave earlier, their invariable appearance does not make for fine contrivance. I suggest, in contrast, their occasional use, so that one’s pleasure is not disturbed. Fab. If I were a painter I would not make use of them invariably, to be sure. But I would put them in frequently, just the same, out of a sense that I would earn greater distinction by doing this than by using them on just a few occasions.

Aret. You are freeborn, and it is open to you to act as you see fit. But I do put it to you that this is by no means all there is to being a good and fully accomplished painter; and a

150 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento THIRTY-FOUR

sola figura, che convenevolmente scorti, basta a dimostrare, che’l Pittor volendo, le saprebbe fare iscortar tutte. Del rilevo, che bisogna dare alle figure, dirs parlando del colorito.

Fab. Senza questa parte, le figure paiono quel, ch’elle sono: cioé piane, e dipinte.

Aret. Ho detto dell’huomo ignudo, seguird hora del vestito, ma poche parole: perche, quanto alla convenevolezza, si dee (come ho detto) conformar l’habito al costume delle nationi, e delle conditioni. E, se’l Pittore fara uno Apostolo, non lo vestira alla corta: ne meno volendo fare un Capitano, gli mettera in dosso una vesta (dird cosi) a maneghe a comeo. E, quanto a panni, dee havere il Pittor riguardo alla qualita loro. Perche altre pieghe fa il velluto, & altre l’ormigino: altre un sottil lino, & altre un grosso grigio. E mestiero similmente di ordinar queste pieghe a luoghi loro in guisa, che elle dimostrino il disotto, e vadano maestrevolmente aggirando per la via, che debbono: ma non si, che taglino, o che il drappo paia attaccato alle carni. E, si come la troppa sodezza fa la figura povera, e non la rende garbata; cosi le molte falde generano confusione, e non piacciono. Bisogna adunque usare ancora in questo quel mezo, che in tutte le cose é lodato. Fab. Non picciola laude merita, chi ben veste le sue figure.

Aret. Vengo al colorito. Di questo, quanto esso importi, ce ne danno bastevole esempio que’ Pittori, che gli uccelli, e i cavalli ingannarono. Fab. Non mi soviene di questi inganni. Aret. E noto insino a fanciulli, che Zeusi dipinse alcune uve tanto simili al vero, che gli uccelli a quelle volavano, credendole vere uve. Et Apelle havendo dimostri alcuni dipinti cavalli di diversi Pittori a certi cavalli veri, essi stettero cheti, senza, che apparisse in loro segno, che essi gli conoscessero per cavalli: ma poi, che egli appresentd loro un suo guadro, ove era un cavallo di sua mano dipinto: quei cavalli subito al veder di questo annitrirono. Fab. Gran testimonio della eccellenza di Apelle. Aret. Potete ancora haver letto, che Parrhasio contendendo con Zeusi, mise in publico una tavola, nella quale altro non era dipinto, fuor che un panno di lino, che pareva, che occultasse alcuna Pittura, si fattamente simile al naturale, che Zeusi

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 151 THIRTY-FOUR

single figure which is foreshortened expediently is sufficient indication that the painter could have foreshortened all of his figures, supposing he had wanted to do so. As for the need to give the figures projection, I shall speak of this when I am discussing coloring. Fab. In default of this element one sees the figures for what they are—that is to say, flat and painted in.

Aret. I have already discussed the nude male figure, and now I shall pass on to its clothed counterpart. But few words are needed here. As regards propriety, that is, costume should accord in its style (as I said earlier) with the wearer’s nationality and station. And

if the painter is working on an apostle, he will not dress him in a short mantle; nor again, if he means to depict a military commander, will he put on his back a gown with (as I shall term them) “looped sleeves.” Where clothes are concerned, the painter should also pay attention to the matter of quality; for velvet and watered silk, a fine linen and a coarse cloth all produce folds of different kinds. And similarly these folds need to be

arranged where they belong in such a way that they show what is underneath and wander in a skillfully organized fashion along the path which they ought to follow— but not so that they cut into another or so that the drapery looks as if it were stuck to the flesh. And just as too great a hardness makes the figure scanty and denies it grace, so a lot of loose ends create confusion and give no pleasure. So here too one needs to follow that middle path which meets with praise in all matters. Fab. The man who clothes his figures well does deserve high commendation. Aret. Which brings me to color. Sufficient illustration of the importance of this is provided by those painters who took in birds and horses. Fab. I donot recall these deceptions.

Aret. Even young children know that Zeuxis painted some grapes which were so lifelike that the birds took them for real grapes and flew down to them. And when Apelles showed a group of real horses paintings of horses done by a variety of artists, they stood quiet, without giving any perceptible sign that they recognized these were indeed horses; but when he put before them a painting with a horse of his own in it, the same horses instantly neighed on sight. Fab. A strong testimony to Apelles’ excellence. Aret. You may also have read how Parrhasius, in competition with Zeuxis, publicly exhibited a panel, with nothing else painted on it but a linen drape, which looked as if it were concealing a picture; and the verisimilitude was so absolute that it led Zeuxis into believing

152 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento THIRTY-FIVE

piu volte hebbe a dire, che lo levasse, e lasciasse vedere la sua Pittura, credendolo vero. Ma nel fine conosciuto il suo errore, si chiamd da lui vinto ; essendo che esso haveva ingannato gli uccelli, e Parrhasio lui, che ne era stato il maestro, che gli haveva dipinti. Prothogene volendo ancora egli dimostrar con la similitudine de’ colori certa schiuma, che uscisse di bocca a un cavallo tutto stanco & affannato, da lui dipinto, havendo ricerco piu volte, mutando colori, d’imitare il vero, non si contentando, nel fine disperato, trasse la spugna, nella quale forbiva i pennelli, alla bocca del cavallo; e trové, che’l caso fece quello effetto, che egli non haveva saputo far con l’arte. Fab. Non fu adunque la lode del Pittore, ma del caso.

Aret. Questo serve alla molta cura, che ponevano gliantichi nel colorire, perche le cose loro imitassero il vero. E certo il colorito é di tanta importanza e forza, che quando il Pittore va imitando bene le tinte e la morbidezza delle carni, e la proprieta di qualunque cosa, fa parer le sue Pitture vive, e tali, che lor non manchino altro, che’l fiato. E la principal parte del colorito il contendimento, che fa il lume con l’ombra: a che si da un mezo, che unisce l’un contrario con I’altro; e fa parer le figure tonde, e piu e meno (secondo il bisogno) distanti, dovendo il Pittore avertire, che nel collocarle elle non facciano confusione. In che e dibisogno parimente di haver buona cognitione di Prospettiva per il diminuir delle cose, che sfuggono, e si fingono lontane. Ma bisogna haver sempre Ilocchio

intento alle tinte principalmente delle carni, & alla morbidezza. Percioche molti ve ne fanno alcune, che paiono di Porfido, si nel colore, come in durezza: e le ombre sono troppo fiere, e le piu volte finiscono in puro negro. Molti le fanno troppo bianche, molti troppo rosse. Jo per me bramerei un colore anzi bruno, che sconvenevolmente bianco: e sbandirei dalle mie Pitture comunemente quelle guancie vermiglie con le labbra di corallo: perche cosi fatti volti paion mascare. Il bruno si legge essere stato frequentato da Apelle. Onde Propertio riprendendo la sua Cinthia, che adoperava i lisci, dice, che egli disiderava, che ella dimostrasse una tale schiettezza e purita di colore, qual si vedeva nelle tavole di Apelle. E vero, che queste tinte si debbono variare, & haver parimente consideratione a i sessi, alle eta, & alle conditioni. A i sessi:

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 153 THIRTY-FIVE

the drape was real, and telling Parrhasius several times over that he should lift it and allow his painting to be seen. In the end, however, he recognized his error and admitted that Parrhasius had outdone him—the point being that he had deceived the birds, and then, for all that he was the master responsible for that painting, Parrhasius had taken him in. Again, Protogenes wanted by dint of lifelike colors to show some foam coming from the mouth of an utterly exhausted and panting horse which he had painted. He made several attempts to imitate the real thing, changing his color scheme each time. But he was not satisfied and finally, in desperation, he took the sponge on which he wiped his brushes and flung it onto the horse’s mouth—only to find that chance produced the very effect which he had been unable to create artistically. Fab. It was not the painter who came in for praise, then, but chance. Aret. This story pays homage to the large amount of trouble which the ancients took over coloring, in order that their products should imitate reality. And certainly coloring is so important and compelling that, when the painter produces a good imitation of the tones

and softness of flesh and the rightful characteristics of any object there may be, he makes his paintings seem alive, to the point where breath is the only thing missing in them. And the foremost element in coloring is contrast. It produces light along with shadow, the source for a mean unifying the two opposites, and makes the figures appear round and more or less distant (as the need arises). The painter should take care, however, that his arrangement of them does not mean that they cause confusion. And in this

context one needs to be equally well conversant with perspective, so that the objects which recede from the eye diminish in size and give the illusion of being some distance away. Invariably, however, one needs to keep one’s eye fixed on the tones, primarily those of the flesh areas, and on softness. For many artists render some of these areas so that they seem made of porphyry, both in color and in hardness; their shadows too are too harsh and most often end in pure black. Many make the same areas too white, and many too red. I for my part would wish for a brown hue rather than one that was white

in an unseemly way, and would generally banish from my paintings those vermilion cheeks with lips of coral, because faces treated in this fashion look like masks. One reads that brown was what Apelles liked to use. And this explains why Propertius, in reprov-

ing his Cynthia for her use of rouges, says that he wished that she displayed such a plainness and purity of color as one saw in the paintings of Apelles. It is true that these tones should vary and equally display a respect for the sexes, age and station: the sexes,

154 Dolce’s ‘‘Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento THIRTY-SIX

che altro colore generalmente conviene alle carni d’una giovane, & altro ancora d’un giovane: all’eta, che altro si richiede a un vecchio, & altro pure a un giovene. Et alle conditioni: che non ricerca a un contadino guello, che appartiene a un gentil’huomo.

Fab. Di queste cattive tinte parmi, che si vegga assai notabile esempio in una tavola di Lorenzo Loto, che é qui in Vinegia nella Chiesa de’ Carmini. Aret. Non ci mancano esempi d’altri Pittori, de’ quali se io facessi in lor presenza mentione, essi torcerebbono il naso. Ora bisogna che la mescolanza de’ colori sia sfumata & unita di modo, che rappresenti il naturale, e non resti cosa, che offenda gliocchi: come sono le linee de’ contorni, lequali si debbono fuggire (che la Natura non le fa) e la negrezza, ch’io dico dell’ombre fiere e disunite. Questi lumi & ombre posti con giudicio & arte fanno tondeggiar le figure: e danno loro il rilevo, che si ricerca: delqual rilevo le figure, che sono prive, paiono, come ben diceste, dipinte, percioche resta la superficie piana. Chi adunque ha questa parte, ne ha una delle piu importanti. Cosi la principal difficulta del

colorito e posta nella imitation delle carni, e consiste nella varieta delle tinte, e nella morbidezza. Bisogna dipoi sapere imitare il color de’ panni, la seta, l’oro, & ogni qualita cosi bene, che paia di veder la durezza, o la tenerezza piu e meno, secondo che alla condition del panno si conviene. saper fingere il lustro delle armi, il fosco della notte, la chia-

rezza del giorno; lampi, fuochi, lumi, acqua, terra, sassi, herbe, arbori, frondi, fiori, frutti, edifici, casamenti, animali, e si fatte cose tanto a pieno, che elle habbiano tutte del vivo, e non satino mai gliocchi di chi le mira. Ne creda alcuno, che la forza del colorito consista nella scelta de’ bei colori: come belle lache, bei azurri, bei verdi, e simili; per-

cioche questi colori sono belli parimente, senza, che e’ si mettano in opera: ma nel sapergli maneggiare convenevolmente. Ho conosciuto io in questa citta un Pittore, che imitava benissimo il Zambellotto, ma non sapeva vestire il nudo, e pareva, che quello fosse non panno, ma una pezza di zambellotto gettata sopra la figura a caso. Altri in contrario non sanno imitar la diversita delle tinte de’ panni, ma pongono solamente i colori

pieni, come essi stanno, in guisa, che nelle opere loro non si ha a lodare altro, che i colori.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 155 THIRTY-SIX

in that one color generally suits the flesh of a young girl and still another that of a young man; age, in that an old man calls for something different from a young one; and station, in that what is apposite to a nobleman is not required in the case of a peasant. Fab. It seems to me that a notable enough example of these pernicious tones is to be seen in a painting of Lorenzo Lotto’s, which is here in Venice in the Church of the Carmine.

Aret. One finds plenty of examples in the work of other painters, who would turn up their noses at me if I were to bring up this subject in their presence. Now the blending of the colors needs to be diffused and unified in such a way that it is naturalistic, and that nothing offends the gaze such as contour lines, which should be avoided (since nature does not produce them), and blackness, a term I use for harsh and unintegrated shadows. These lights and darks, when they are laid out with judgment and skill, make the figures rounded, and give them the projection which is needed; whereas figures which are devoid of this projection look painted, as you rightly say, since their surface remains flat. Consequently the man who has command of this element commands one of the most important ones. The main problem of coloring resides, then, in the imitation of flesh, and involves diversifying the tones and achieving softness. Next one needs to know how to imitate the color of draperies, silk, gold and every kind of material so well that hardness or softness seems to be communicated to the greater or lesser degree which suits the quality of the material. One should know how to simulate the glint of armor, the gloom of night and

the brightness of day, lightning flashes, fires, lights, water, earth, rocks, grass, trees, leaves, flowers and fruits, buildings and huts, animals and so on, so comprehensively that all of them possess life, and never surfeit the admirer’s eyes. And let no one think that what gives coloring its effectiveness is the choice of a beautiful palette, such as fine lakes, fine azures, fine greens and so on; for these colors are just as beautiful without their being put to work. Rather this effectiveness comes from knowing how to handle them in the proper way. I once knew a painter in this city who imitated camblet excellently, but did not know how to dress a nude figure, and what one saw gave the impression not of drapery but of a piece of camblet arbitrarily thrown over the figure. Others by contrast do not know how to reproduce the variety of tones one gets in clothing, but

merely lay on the colors at full strength, just as they are, so that there is nothing else for one to praise in their work, apart from the colors.

156 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento THIRTY-SEVEN

Fab. In questo mi pare, che ci si voglia una certa convenevole sprezzatura, in modo, che non ci sia ne troppa vaghezza di colorito, ne troppa politezza di figure: ma si vegga nel tutto una amabile sodezza. Percioche sono alcuni Pittori, che fanno le lor figure si fattamente pulite, che pajono sbellettate, con acconciature di capegli ordinati con tanto studio, che pur uno non esce dell’ordine. IIche é vitio e non virtu: perche si cade nell’affettatione, che priva di gratia qualunque cosa. Onde il guidicioso Petrarca parlando del capello della sua Laura, chiamollo,

Negletto ad arte, innanellato, & hirto. E di qui avertisce Horatio, che si debbano levar via da i Poemi gli ornamenti ambitiosi.

Aret. Bisogna sopra tutto fuggire la troppa diligenza, che in tutte le cose nuoce. Onde Apelle soleva dire, che Prothogene (se io non prendo errore) in ciascuna parte del dipingere gli era eguale, e forse superiore: ma egli in una cosa il vinceva; e questa era, ch’ei non sapeva levar la mano dalla Pittura. Fab. O quanto la soverchia diligenza é anco dannosa ne gli Scrittori: percioche, ove si conosce fatica, ivi necessariamente é durezza & affettatione, la quale é sempre abhorrita da chi legge.

Aret. Finalmente ricerca al Pittore un’altra parte: dellaquale la Pittura, ch’é priva, riman, come si dice, fredda, & € a guisa di corpo morto, che non opera cosa veruna. Questo é, che

bisogna, che le figure movano glianimi de’ riguardanti, alcune turbandogli, altre rallegrandogli, altre sospingendogli a pieta, & altre a sdegno, secondo la qualita della historia. Altrimenti reputi il Pittore di non haver fatto nulla: perche questo é il condimento di tutte le sue virtu: come aviene parimente al Poeta, all’Historico, & all’Oratore: che se le cose scritte o recitate mancano di questa forza, mancano elle ancora di spirito e di vita. Ne puo movere il Pittore, se prima nel far delle figure non sente nel suo animo quelle passioni, o diciamo affetti, che vuole imprimere in quello d’altrui. Onde dice il tante volte allegato Horatio, se vuoi, ch’io pianga, é mestiero, che tu avanti ti dolga teco.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 157 THIRTY-SEVEN

Fab, It seems to me that what is needed in this context is a certain proper casualness, so that one does not get either too much beauty in the coloring or too high a finish in the figures, but sees in the whole an agreeable firmness of handling. There are certain painters, that is, who make their figures so supremely finished that they look prettified, with their hair styles so diligently arranged that not even a single lock is out of line. And this is vice, not virtue, because there is a lapse into affectation, which denies grace to any object there may be. Hence why the discriminating Petrarch, in speaking of his Laura’s hair, described it as being: Untouched by art, curly and quite unkempt.

And Horace gives warning in this context of the need for pretentious ornamentation to be removed from poems. Aret. Above all one should avoid overconscientiousness, which does harm in all human affairs. Hence Apelles’ habit of saying that Protogenes (if I am not mistaken) was his equal and

possibly his superior in every aspect of painting; but there was one matter in which he won out, and this was that Protogenes was not able to let the picture be. Fab. Oh, how much excessive meticulousness does harm in writers as well! For where effort is discernible, there rigidity and affectation are necessarily present, both of which are invariably shunned by the reader. Aret. Lastly the painter should have at his command one other element, of such a kind that the painting which does not possess it remains cold, as the saying is, and like a dead body that is totally inactive. What is needed is that the figures should stir the spectators’ souls —disturbing them in some cases, cheering them in others, in others again inciting them to either compassion or disdain, depending on the character of the subject matter. Failing this, the painter should not claim to have accomplished anything. For this is what gives the flavor to all his virtues. Exactly the same thing happens with the poet, the historian and the public speaker; if their products, that is, whether written or recited, lack this power to move, they lack also spirit and life. Nor can the painter stir emotion unless he already experiences in his own being, while executing the figures, those passions—or shall we say “states of mind’—which he wishes to imprint on the mind of another. And this is why Horace, who has been quoted so many times, observes: If you want me to cry, then there’s a need That sorrow on your own part should precede.

a 158 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento

THIRTY-EIGHT

Ne e possibile, che alcuno con la man fredda riscaldi colui, ch’egli tocca. Ma Dante ristringe bene la perfetta eccellenza del Pittore in questi versi.

Morte li morti, ei vivi parean vivi, Non vide me’ di me chi vide il vero.

E benche il pervenire alla perfettione della eccellenza della Pittura, allaquale fa mestiero di tante cose, sia impresa malagevole & faticosa, e gratia della liberalita de’ cieli conceduta a pochi (che nel vero bisogna, che’l Pittore, cosi bene, come il Poeta, nasca, e sia figliuolo della Natura) non é da credere, (come toccai da prima) che ci sia una sola forma del perfetto dipingere: anzi, perche le complessioni de gli huomini, e gli humori sono diversi, cosi ne nascono diverse maniere: e ciascuno segue quella, a cui é inchinato naturalmente. Di gui ne nacquero Pittori diversi; alcuni piacevoli, altri terribili, altri vaghi, et altri ripieni di grandezza e di maesta: come veggiamo medesimamente trovarsi ne gl’Historici, ne’ Poeti, e ne gli Oratori. Ma di questo diremo un poco piu avanti: percioche hora io voglio venire al paragone, per cui e nato questo ragionamento. Fab. E buona pezza, ch’io attendo, che ci vegniate.

Aret. Questo poco, che ho detto, é in universale tutto quello, che appartiene alla Pittura. Se farete desideroso d’intendere alcuni particolari, potrete leggere il libretto, che scrisse della

Pittura Leon Battista Alberti, tradotto felicemente, come tutte le altre sue cose, da M. Lodovico Domenichi: e l’opera del Vasari.

Fab. Parmi, che basti non solo a perfettamente giudicar, ma anco a perfettamente dipingere, questo tanto, che n’havete favellato: percioche le altre cose per lo piu consistono nell’essercitio e nella pratica. E fra quante mi havete detto, me ne piacciono sommamente due: una, che bisogna, che le Pitture movano: I’altra, che’l Pittore nasca. Percioche ci si veggono molti, che alla parte della industria non hanno mancato; e si sono affaticati lungo tempo ne’ rilievi, e nelle cose vive; e mai non hanno potuto passare un mediocre termino. Altri, che per un

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 159 THIRTY-EIGHT

Nor is it possible that someone whose hand is cold should warm the person whom he touches. But Dante pins down the acme of the painter’s excellence nicely in his lines: The dead seemed dead, and the alive seemed living; Not he who saw the actuality saw More clearly than I found myself perceiving.

And for all that attaining to the acme of excellence in painting, which involves so many

requisites, is an intricate and demanding undertaking, and a favor accorded by the bounty of heaven to few (so that the painter really needs to be born that way, just as much as the poet does, and to be nature’s child)—still there is no call to believe (as I intimated earlier) that perfect painting takes one form and one form only. On the contrary,

the very fact that diversity exists in the complexions and humors of mankind means a corresponding diversity in the modes which issue from them; and each man follows the mode towards which he is naturally predisposed. Hence the emergence in the past of painters of differing kinds: some agreeable, others awe-inspiring, some charming, and others again replete with grandeur and majesty—a range which we find equally in evidence amongst the historians, poets and public speakers. But this is a point we shall talk about a little later on; for the moment, that is, I am set on arriving at the comparison which originally called this discussion of ours into being. Fab. I have been waiting a long time for you to get this far.

Aret. The little that I have now said covers, in universal terms, everything that pertains to painting. If there are certain points of detail that you find yourself anxious to grasp, you can read the little book which Leon Battista Alberti wrote on painting; it is felicitously translated, like all his other productions, by Messer Lodovico Domenichi. Also the works by Vasari.

Fab. It seems to me that the amount you have said here is enough of a basis not only for judging perfectly, but also for painting perfectly; for what is left over mostly entails practice and experience. And amongst the points you have made to me in such quantity, two afford me the highest pleasure. One is your point that paintings need to move the spectator, and the other your point that the painter is born that way. For there are many artists in evidence, who have a faultless record as far as industry is concerned, and have worked long and hard at producing projection and studying things from the life; yet they have never been able to get beyond a terminal mediocrity. Others have displayed for a

160 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento THIRTY-NINE

tempo hanno dimostro principi, grandissimi, et hanno caminato un pezzo avanti scorti dalla Natura, e poi da lei abandonati, sono tornati all’indietro, riuscendo nulla. Onde si puo ridur benissimo a cotal proposito quei versi sententiosissimi dell’ Ariosto, col mutamento di due parole. Sono i Poeti & i Pittori pochi; Pittori, che non sian del nome indegni.

Poi, quanto al movimento, poche Pitture ho io veduto qui in Vinegia (levandone quelle del Divin Titiano) che movano. Aret. Ricercando adunque tutte le parti, che si richieggono al Pittore, troveremo, che Michel’ Agnolo ne possede una sola, che é il disegno, e che Rafaello le possedeva tutte: o almeno (perche l’‘huomo non puo esser Dio, a cui niuna cosa manca) la maggior parte; e se gli manco alcuna cosa, quella essere stata pochissima, e di picciolo momento. Fab. Provetelo. Aret. Prima, quanto alla inventione, chi riguarda bene, e considera minutamente le Pitture del’uno e dell’altro, trovera, Rafaello haver mirabilmente osservato tutto quello, che a questa appartiene; e Michel’Agnolo o niente 0 poco. Fab. Mi par cio una gran disuguaglianza di paragone. Aret. Non dico di piu del vero. Et uditemi con pacienza. Per lasciar da parte cio che richiede alI’Historia (in che Rafaello imito talmente gli Scrittori, che spesso il giudicio de gl’intendenti si move a credere, che questo Pittore habbia le cose meglio dipinte, che essi discritte; o almeno, che seco giostri di pari,) e parlando della convenevolezza, Rafaello non se ne diparti giamai: ma fece i putti putti, cioe morbidetti e teneri: gli huomini robusti, e le donne con quella delicatezza, che convien loro. Fab. Non ha serbata il gran Michel’Agnolo ancora egli questa convenevolezza?

Aret. Se io voglio piacere a voi, & a suoi fautori, diro che si: ma se debbo dir la verita, v’affermo di no. Che se ben vedete nelle Pitture di Michel’Agnolo la distintione in general dell’eta e de’ sessi (cosa, che

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 161 THIRTY-NINE

time principles of the highest order, and have traveled a certain distance forward under the guidance of nature—only to turn back, when nature subsequently deserted them, so that they achieved nothing in the way of success. Hence one can most suitably adapt to this context those very pithy verses of Ariosto’s which run, when two words are altered: Poets are rare, and painters prove the same— Painters who really do deserve this name.

Then again, where moving the spectator is concerned, I have seen few paintings here in Venice (leaving aside those by the divine Titian) which accomplish this. Aret. We will find, therefore, as we look into all of the elements which the painter needs to command, that Michelangelo has at his disposal only one of them, that is to say, draftsmanship, whereas Raphael had all of them at his disposal—or at least (since man cannot

be God, who is without a deficiency of any kind) the majority; and that, if there was something which was missing in him, the element in point was extremely minor and of little consequence.

Fab. Prove this. Aret. Take invention first. The man who takes a good look at pictures by one and the other and examines them in detail will find that Raphael has complied admirably, in every respect, with what is appropriate here, and Michelangelo has done this either not at all, or minimally.

Fab. This seems to me a very unfair basis for comparison.

Aret. JI am not saying more than the truth and ask that you hear me out patiently. Leaving aside the demands of historical narrative (here Raphael imitated the writers to such a degree that the judgment of connoisseurs is often stirred into crediting this painter with having depicted the events better than the writers had described them, or at least into considering that the two compete together on equal terms), I have this to say on the subject of propriety: Raphael never deviated from it, but made his children really children— that is, somewhat soft and tender—his men robust and his women delicate in the way which is fitting in their case. Fab. Has the great Michelangelo not also maintained this same propriety? Aret. If my desire is to please you and his supporters, I will say yes; but if I am bound to tell

the truth, my affirmation to you is no. In the paintings of Michelangelo, that is, even though you see the ages and the sexes differentiated in a general way (something which

162 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY

sanno far tutti) non la troverete gia partitamente ne muscoli. Ne voglio stare a metter mano nelle sue cose; si per la riverenza, ch’io gli porto, e che si dee portare a cotale huomo; si perche non é necessario. Ma che direte voi della honesta? Pare a voi, che si convenga, per dimostrar le difficulta dell’arte di scoprir sempre senza rispetto quelle parti delle figure ignude, che la vergogna e la honesta celate tengono: non havendo riguardo ne alla santita delle persone, che si rappresentano, ne al luogo, ove stanno dipinte? Fab. Voi siete troppo rigido e scrupoloso. Aret. Chi ardira di affermar, che stia bene, che nella Chiesia di San Pietro, Prencipe de gli Apostoli, in una Roma, ove concorre tutto il mondo: nella cappella del Pontefice; ilquale, come ben dice il Bembo, in terra ne assembra Dio, si veggano dipinti tanti ignudi, che dimostrano dishonestamente dritti e riversi: cosa nel vero (favellando con ogni somessione) di quel santissimo luogo indegna. Ecco, che le leggi prohibiscono, che non si stampino libri dishonesti: quanto maggiormente si debbono prohibir simili Pitture. Percioche pare egli forse a voi, che elle movano le menti de’ riguardanti a divotione? o le alzino alla contemplatione delle cose divine? Ma concedasi a Michel’Agnolo per la sua gran virtu quello, che non si concederebbe a verun’altro. Et a noi sia lecito ancora di dire il vero. E se non é lecito, non voglio anco haver detto questo: benche io no’! dica per mordere, ne per mostrar, ch’io solo sappia. Fab. Gliocchi sani, Signor Pietro, non si corrompono, o scandalezzano punto per veder dipinte le cose della Natura: ne gl’infermi riguardano che che sia con sanamente. E potete comprendere, che quando cio fosse di tanto cattivo esempio, non si comporterebbe. Ma poi, che andate ponderando le cose con la severita di Socrate, vi dimando, se egli ancora pare

a voi, che Rafaello dimostrasse honesta, quando dissegno in carte, e fece intagliare a Marc’Antonio in rame quelle donne et huomini, che lascivamente, & anco dishonestamente si abbracciano? Aret. Io vi potrei rispondere, che Rafaello non ne fu inventore, ma Giulio Romano suo creato

et herede. Ma posto pure, ch’egli le havesse o tutto, o parte disegnate, non le publico per le piazze

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 163 FORTY

is within the capacity of everyone), you certainly will not find such differentiation section by section within the musculature. Not that I want to pause and lay a rough hand on his creations—for one thing, there is my own respect for him, and the deference one should feel towards such a man; and for another, there is no necessity. But what will you say on the subject of decency? Does it seem proper to you that an artist, to show off the complexities of his art, should constantly and disrespectfully expose those parts of his nude figures which shame and decency keep concealed, without regard either for the sanctity of the persons depicted, or for the place in which they stand on display? Fab. You are being too inflexible and moralistic. Aret. Who would dare to maintain that in the Church of Saint Peter, chief of the Apostles, in

a Rome, where the whole world assembles, and in the Chapel of the Pope, who, as Bembo rightly observes, is God’s equivalent on earth, it was proper that one should see depicted such a quantity of nudes, who display their fronts and backs in an immodest way—a matter, in fact (I say this with all due respect), unworthy of this place of great sanctity. Notice that the laws forbid the publication of indecent books—how much the more should pictures of the same kind be banned. For do you by any chance consider that they act on the spectators’ minds as a stimulus to devotions or elevate them into contemplating the divine? But let Michelangelo be allowed, because of his great prowess, a freedom which one would not concede to anyone else at all; and let me too be allowed a freedom—freedom to speak the truth. If I am not permitted as much, I wish unsaid these comments of mine, even though I do not make them in order to profit at someone else’s expense, nor in order to demonstrate that I alone am perspicacious. Fab. Sound eyes, sir, are not in the slightest degree corrupted or shocked from seeing the facts of nature in pictorial form; nor do diseased ones look at anything whatever with sound understanding. And you can understand that if this work did indeed set so bad an example, it would not be tolerated. But since you go weighing things up with the severity of Socrates, I have a question for you: Do you still consider that Raphael showed a sense of decency when he designed those cartoons of men and women embracing one another lasciviously and also indecently and had Marcantonio make copper-plate engravings from them?

Aret. I could answer you by saying that it was not Raphael who invented them, but Giulio Romano, his pupil and successor. Even supposing, however, that Raphael had designed either the whole series or a part of it, he did not put them on public display in the city

164 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-ONE

ne per le Chiese: ma vennero esse alle mani di Marc’Antonio, che per trarne utile l’intaglid al Baviera. Ilqual Marc’Antonio, se non era l’opera mia, sarebbe stato da Papa Leone della sua temerita degnamente punito. Fab. Questa é una coperta sopra l’aloeé di zucchero fino.

Aret. Io non mi discosto punto dalla verita. Ne si disconviene al Pittore di fare alle volte per giuoco simili cose: come gia alcuni Poeti antichi scherzarono lascivamente in gratia di Mecenate sopra la imagine di Priapo per honorare i suoi horti. Ma in publico, e massimamente in luoghi sacri e in soggetti divini: si dee haver sempre risguardo alla honesta. E sarebbe assai meglio, che quelle figure di Michel’Agnolo fossero piu abondevoli in honesta, e manco perfette in disegno, che, come si vede, perfettissime e dishonestissime. Ma questa honesta uso sempre il buon Rafaello in tutte le cose sue, in tanto, che, quantunque egli desse generalmente alle sue figure un’aria dolce e gentile, che invaghisce &

infiamma: nondimeno ne i volti delle sante, & sopra tutto della Vergine, madre del Signore, serbo sempre un non so che di santita e di divinita (e non pur ne’ volti, ma in tutti i lor movimenti) che par, che levi dalla mente de glihuomini ogni reo pensiero. Onde in questa parte della inventione, si d’intorno alla historia, quanto alla convenevolezza, Rafaello e superiore. Fab. Non so, guanto al componimento della Historia, che Michel’Agnolo ceda a Rafaello: anzi tengo il contrario: cioé, che Michel’Agnolo nel vinca d’assai. Percioche odo dire, che nell’ordine del suo stupendo Giudicio si contengono alcuni sensi allegorici profondissimi, iguali vengono intesi da pochi.

enn

Aret. In questo meriterebbe lode, essendo che parrebbe, ch’egli havesse imitato quei gran

Filosofi, che nascondevano sotto velo di Poesia misteri grandissimi della Filosofia humana e divina, affine ch’e’ non fossero intesi dal volgo: quasi che non volessero gettare a Porci

le Margherite. E questo vorrei io ancora credere, che fosse stato l’intendimento di Michel’Agnolo, se non si vedessero nel medesimo Giudicio alcune cose ridicole. Fab. E quali cose ridicole sono queste?

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 165 FORTY-ONE

squares or the churches. Rather, they came into the hands of Marcantonio, and he, for the profit it would bring him, engraved them for Baviera. This same Marcantonio, but for the action I took, would have been deservedly punished for his temerity by Pope Leo. Fab. This is a “sweetening of the pill.” Aret. I am not deviating from the truth in the slightest. And it is not improper for the artist to produce such works occasionally, by way of a pastime. Already in antiquity, for example,

certain poets made lascivious play with the image of Priapus, in honor of Maecenas and in tribute to his gardens. In public, however, and most especially in those cases where the place is sacred and the subject matter is devoted to God, one should always pay attention to decency. And if these figures of Michelangelo’s were more fully decent and less perfect in their design, this would be a good deal better than the extreme perfection and extreme indecency that one actually views. But the upright Raphael always maintained this decency in all of his creations. As a result, even though he generally gave his figures a soft and gentle air which charms one and sets one on fire, he nonetheless invariably preserved, on the faces of his saints and above all on the face of the Virgin Mother of Christ, an indefinable quality of holiness and godliness (and not only on the faces, but also in each and all of the movements)—a quality which seems to remove every nefarious thought from the minds of mankind. In this same province of invention,

therefore—whether narrative subject matter or propriety is in question—Raphael is superior. Fab. I do not see that, where narrative composition is concerned, Michelangelo yields place to

Raphael. Indeed, I maintain the opposite: to wit, that Michelangelo comes out a good way ahead. I venture to say, that is, that his stupendous Last Judgment embodies in its arrangement certain allegorical meanings of great profundity which few people arrive at understanding. Aret. In that case he would indeed deserve praise—the point being the impression he gave of

having imitated those great philosophers who shrouded beneath the veil of poetry supreme mysteries of human and theological philosophy so that they would not be grasped by the masses; as if they did not wish to cast pearls before swine. And I too would be willing to believe that this was Michelangelo’s intention, if certain absurdities did not present themselves in this same Last Judgment. Fab. And what are these absurdities?

a

166 Dolce’s ‘“Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-TWO

Aret. Non é cosa ridicola l’haversi imaginato in cielo tra la moltitudine dell’anime beate alcuni,

che teneramente si baciano; ove dovrebbono essere intenti e col pensiero levati alla divina contemplatione, et alla futura sentenza: massimamente in un giorno si terribile,

come leggiamo e indubitatamente crediamo, che habbia ad esser quello del giudicio: nel

quale si canta nel sacro Hinno, che stupira la morte e parimente la Natura: dovendo risuscitare in tal giorno la humana generatione, laquale havra a render partitamente ragione delle buone e delle ree operationi, da lei fatte in vita, all’eterno giudice delle cose. Poi, che senso mistico si puo cavare dallo haver dipinto Christo sbarbato? o dal vedere un Diavolo, che tira in gui con la mano, aggrappata ne’ testicoli, una gran figura, che per

dolore si morde il dito? Ma di gratia non mi fate andar piu avanti, accioche non paia, ch’io dica male d’un’huomo, che per altro e divino. Fab. Vi ritorno a dire, che la sua inventione é ingegnosissima, e da pochi intesa.

Aret. Non mi par molta lode, che gliocchi de’ fanciulli, e delle matrone e donzelle, veggano apertamente in quelle figure la dishonesta, che dimostrano, e solo i dotti intendano la profondita delle allegorie, che nascondono. Ma io vi dird di lui, come dicono, che hebbe a dire un dotto e Santo huomo di Persio Poeta Satirico, il quale é oscurissimo fuor di modo. Se non vuoi essere inteso, ne io voglio intenderti: e con queste parole lo trasse in

fuoco, facendone conveniente sacrificio a Vulcano: cosi voglio dire io, poi che Michel’Agnolo non vuole, che le sue inventioni vengano intese, senon da pochi e dotti, io, che di questi pochi e dotti non sono, ne lascio il pensiero a lui. Habbiamo considerato Michel’Aegnolo nelle Historie sacre. Consideriamo un poco Rafaello nelle profane: perche, ove in gueste lo ritroveremo accuratissimo & honestissimo, comprenderemo, quanto piu egli

sia stato in quelle altre. |

Fab. Io v’ascolto. Aret. Non so, se habbiate veduto appresso il nostro Dolce la carta della Rosana di mano di Rafaello; che fu gia stampata in rame. Fab. Non mi ricorda.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 167 FORTY-TWO

Aret. Surely it is a ridiculous thing to have imagined that in heaven, amongst the multitude of blessed souls, some should be tenderly embracing one another—when in fact their con-

| centration should be directed and their thoughts uplifted towards contemplation of God and their future sentence, especially on a day so awesome as we read and undoubtedly believe that the Day of Judgment should be. The sacred Hymn we sing says on this subject that death and nature shall alike stand transfixed; for on this day the generation of man is to rise again, and will be called on to render to the Eternal Judge of the Universe a point-by-point account of the good and the evil deeds which, in life, it had committed. And then, what mystical meaning can one extract from his having depicted Christ without a beard, or from seeing a devil who drags a large figure down with a hand-grip on his testicles, so that he bites his finger because of the pain? But please do not make me go any further, so that it does not appear that I am slandering a man who is in any event divine.

Fab. JI tell you a second time that his invention is most ingenious and understood by few.

Aret. It is none too commendable to me that the eyes of infants, mothers and girls should be afforded an open view of the immodesty which these figures display; and that only men of learning should understand the profundity of the allegories hidden behind them. But I will give you on the subject of Michelangelo the comment which a learned and holy man had to offer, so they say, on the satirical poet Persius, whose obscurity is improperly

extreme: “If you do not want to be understood, I do not want to understand you”; and with these words he cast him into the fire, treating him as an appropriate sacrifice to Vulcan. Similarly, I wish to say that if Michelangelo does not want anyone to understand his inventions, apart from a small number of intellectuals, then I, who am not one of the intellectual few in question, leave thinking about them to him. Now that we have considered Michelangelo’s treatment of religious subjects, let us give a little attention to Raphael’s handling of secular ones. When we find out, that is, how completely accurate and decent he was on this front, we will understand how much more this was true of his performance on that other front. Fab. I am all ears. Aret. I do not know if you have seen at our friend Dolce’s house the cartoon of Roxana from Raphael’s hand, which has already been engraved on copper. Fab. I do not remember it.

168 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-THREE

Aret. Questa é una carta, nella quale rappresentd Rafaello in disegno di acquarella, tocco ne’ chiari con biacca, la incoronatione di Rosana: laquale essendo bellissima femina, fu amata grandemente da Alessandro Magno. E adunque in questa carta disegnato il detto Alessandro: ilquale stando inanzi a Rosana, le porge la corona: & ella siede accanto un letto con attitudine timida e riverente: & é tutta ignuda, fuorche, per cagione di serbar la honesta, un morbidetto panniccino le nasconde le parti, che debbono tenersi nascose.

Ne si puo imaginar ne la piu dolce aria, ne il piu delicato corpo, con una pienezza di carne convenevole; e con istatura, che non eccede in lunghezza, ma é@ svelta convenevolmente. Evvi un fanciullo ignudo con I’ali, che le scalcia i piedi; & un/‘altro dal disopra, che le ordina i capegli. V’é anco alquanto piu lontano un giovanetto pur nudo, raffigurato per Himeneo, Dio delle nozze, che dimostra col dito ad Alessandro la medesima Rosana: come invitandolo al trastullo di Venere, o di Giunone, & un’huomo, che porta la face. Evvi piu oltre un groppo di fanciulli: de’ quali alcuni ne portano uno sopra lo scudo di Alessandro, dimostrando fatica e vivacita conveniente a glianni, & un’altro porta la sua lancia. Ce n’é uno, che essendosi vestito la sua corazza, non potendo reggere il peso, € caduto in terra, e par che piagna. E sono tutti di aria, e di attitudini diverse, e bellissimi. In questo componimento Rafaello ha servito alla historia, alla convenevolezza, & all’ honesto. Et oltre a cio s’é imaginato di suo, come Poeta mutolo, la inventione d’Himeneo, & de’ fanciulli. Fab. Questa inventione parmi haver letta in Luciano. Aret. Sia, come si voglia: ella é espressa cosi bene, che potrebbe venire in dubbio, se Rafaello I’havesse tolta da libri di Luciano; o Luciano dalle Pitture di Rafaello: se non fosse, che Luciano nacque piu secoli avanti. Ma che ée percid? Anco Virgilio discrisse il suo Laocoonte tale, quale I’haveva prima veduto nella statua di mano de i tre artefici Rhodiani: laquale con istupor di tutti hoggidi ancora si vede in Roma. Et é cosa iscambievole, che i Pittori cavino spesso le loro inventioni da i Poeti, & i Poeti da i Pittori. I] simile vi potrei

dire della sua Galathea, che contende con la bella Poesia del Policiano, e di molte altre sue leggiadrissime fantasie: ma sarei troppo lungo: e voi

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 169 FORTY-THREE

Aret. This is a cartoon which Raphael laid out in watercolor, touching in the highlights with white lead. Its subject is the coronation of Roxana, a lady who, because of her exceptional beauty, was greatly loved by Alexander the Great. Hence this same Alexander is included in the design of this cartoon, standing before Roxana and holding out the crown to her. And she sits beside a bed in a timid and reverent pose—completely naked, except that in order to maintain decency a rather soft little piece of drapery conceals those parts

of her which should keep themselves hidden. And one cannot conceive either of a sweeter expression, or of a more delicate body, with a fitting fullness of flesh and a shape which, without being too long, is appropriately slim. One sees a naked winged boy there who takes off her shoes, and a second up above who arranges her hair. A little farther off there is also a young man, naked as well—recognizable as Hymen, the god of marriage, who points out the same Roxana to Alexander with his finger, as if inviting him to participate in the sport of Venus or Juno; also a man carrying a torch. Farther off one

sees a group of infant children, some of whom support one of their number on top of Alexander’s shield, showing a strain and a vivacity which are in accord with their age. Still another carries Alexander’s lance, and there is one who has put on Alexander’s cuirass; he has fallen to the ground because he cannot control its weight and seems to be

crying. And one and all have an air about them, and show variety in their poses, and are extremely beautiful. In this composition of his Raphael has observed the dictates of subject matter, propriety and modesty. He has also, above and beyond this, thought up on his own account, in the guise of a mute poet, the invention of Hymen and the infant children. Fab. It seems to me that I have read of this invention in Lucian.

Aret. Be that as it may, it is so well brought into being that doubt could arise as to whether Raphael had lifted it from the pages of Lucian, or Lucian had taken it from the paintings

of Raphael—were it not for the fact that Lucian was born the earlier by several centuries. But what does it matter anyway? Even Virgil in describing his Laocoon followed the way he had previously seen him depicted in the statue from the hand of the three Rhodian craftsmen, which, to the amazement of everyone, is still to be seen in Rome today. And it happens interchangeably that the painters often draw on the poets for their inventions, and the poets on the painters. I could make the same point to you about Raphael’s Galatea, which competes with the lovely poem of Poliziano, and about many other extremely delicate fancies of his. But I would be going on too long, and you may

a 170 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento

FORTY-FOUR

le potete haver veduto altre volte, e vedere quando vi piace in Roma: senza le molte sue bellissime carte, che intagliate in rame per mano del non meno intendente, che diligente Marc’Antonio, vanno a torno: e quelle anco, che di sua mano si trovano appresso di diversi, che € un numero quasi infinito, argomento efficacissimo della fertilita di quel divino ingegno: & in ciascuna si veggono inventioni mirabili con tutti gli avertimenti, ch’io v’ho detto. E in materia sacra vi puo bastare il quadro della santa Cicilia dall’organo, che e in Bologna nella Chiesa di San Giovanni in monte: e quello della Trasfiguration di Christo sopra il monte Tabor, ch’é in San Pietro Montorio di Roma: senza una infinita di quadri, che si veggono per la Italia, tutti belli e tutti divini. Fab. Ho certo veduto molte cose di Rafaello in Roma, & in altra parte: e vi affermo, che sono miracolose, e nelle inventioni eguali, e forse maggiori de quelle di Michel’Agnolo. Ma nel disegno, come potete a lui aguagliarlo? Aret. Io vi lascio Fabrini, e lascierd sempre nel vostro parere, non potendo fare altro: perche le ragioni non persuadono tutti: e cio aviene o per ostinatione, 0 per ignoranza, O per affettione. In voi, nel quale non possono cader I’altre due, ha luogo la terza, laquale e difetto escusabile: e, come io dissi avanti, Spesso occhio ben san fa veder torto.

Ma d’intorno al disegno, ch’é la seconda parte, dovendo noi considerar l‘huomo vestito & ignudo, vi confermo, che guanto al nudo, Michel’Agnolo e stupendo, e veramente miracoloso e sopra humano. ne fu alcuno, che l’avanzasse giamai; ma in una maniera sola, ch’é in fare un corpo nudo muscoloso e ricercato, con iscorti e movimenti fieri, che dimostrano minutamente ogni difficulta dell’arte. & ogni parte di detto corpo, e tutte insieme, sono di tanta eccellenza, che ardisco dire, che non si possa imaginar, non che far, cosa piu eccellente, ne piu perfetta. Ma nelle altre maniere e non solo minore di se stesso, ma di altri ancora; perche egli o non sa, o non vuole osservar quelle diversita delle eta e de i sessi, che si son dette di sopra: nelle quali é tanto mirabile Rafaello. E, per conchiuderla, chi vede una sola

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 171 FORTY-FOUR

have seen these works on other occasions, and can see them at your pleasure in Rome. I leave out too his many extremely beautiful cartoons, which circulate in the form of copper-plate engravings carried out by no less knowledgeable than painstaking Marcantonio, and also those from his own hand which are found amongst a variety of owners. There is almost no numbering how many of them there are, a most efficacious argument for the fertility of this divine genius, and in each one of them one sees marvellous inventions, with all the notable characteristics which I have mentioned to you. And in the way of religious subjects, the painting of St. Cecilia, the organess, which is in Bologna in the Church of San Giovanni in Monte and the one of the Transfiguration of Christ above Mount Tabor which is in the Roman church of San Pietro Montorio may be enough for you, leaving aside an infinite number of pictures which are to be seen throughout Italy, all of them beautiful and all divine. Fab. I have certainly seen many works of Raphael’s in Rome and elsewhere, and J assure you that they are miraculous and, in their content of invention, equal and perhaps superior to those of Michelangelo. But in the matter of draftsmanship, how can you make Raphael into Michelangelo’s equal?

Aret. I let you be in your opinion, Fabrini, and always will let you be, being unable to do otherwise. For reasons do not persuade everyone, and either obstinacy or ignorance or affection constitutes the reason why this happens. In you, who are unsusceptible to the other two, it is the third which is at work. This is an excusable failing and, as I said earlier, “a great misguider of the soundest eye.” But since, in the matter of design, which constitutes the second element, we should consider the human being clothed and naked, I do confirm to you that, as far as the nude is concerned, Michelangelo is stupendous, and truly miraculous and superhuman; nor was there ever anyone who surpassed him. He is supreme, however, in only one mode—supreme, that is, at making a nude body muscular and elaborated, with foreshortenings and bold movements which show off in detail every artistic problem; and each individual section of the body in question and all of them together are so outstandingly excellent that I venture to say that one cannot imagine, let alone produce, anything more excellent or more perfect. In the other modes, however, he fails to measure up not just to himself, but to others as well—the reason being that he either does not recognize or else is unwilling to take into account those distinctions between the ages and the sexes which were mentioned earlier, and which Raphael handles so admirably. And to wind the matter up, the man who sees a single

172 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-FIVE

figura di Michel’Agnolo, le vede tutte. Ma é da avertire, che Michel’Agnolo ha preso del nudo la forma piu terribile e ricercata, e Rafaello la piu piacevole e gratiosa. Onde alcuni hanno comparato Michel’Agnolo a Dante, e Rafaello al Petrarca.

Fab. Non m/andate inviluppando con si fatte comparationi, benche elle facciano in mio favore: perche in Dante ci é sugo e dottrina, e nel Petrarca solo leggiadrezza di stilo, & ornamenti Poetici. Onde mi ricorda, che un frate minoritano, che predicd, molti anni sono, a Vinegia, allegando alle volte questi due Poeti, soleva chiamar Dante Messer Settembre, e il Petrarca M. Maggio, alludendo alle stagioni, l’una piena di frutti, & l’altra di fiori. Ma recatevi inanzi un nudo di Michel’Agnolo, & un’altro di Rafaello: & havendogli prima ambedue pienamente considerati, risolvetevi poi in dire, qual de i due é piu perfetto. Aret. Jo vi dico, che Rafaello sapeva far bene ogni sorte di nudi, e Michel’Agnolo riesce eccellente in una sola: & i nudi di Rafaello han questo di piu, che dilettano maggiormente. Ne dird, come gia disse un bello ingegno, che Michel’Agnolo ha dipinto i facchini, e Rafaello i gentilhuomini. Che, come ho detto, Rafaello ne ha fatti di ogni sorte, e di piacevoli, e di

terribili e ricercati, benche con atti piu temperati e piu dolci. Ma naturalmente e stato vago di pulitezza e di delicatezza; si come era etiandio pulitissimo e gentilissimo ne’ costumi, in guisa che non meno fu amato da tutti, di quello, che a tutti fossero grate le sue figure. Fab. Non basta a dire, questo nudo é bello e perfetto, quanto quell’altro. Ma bisogna provarlo.

een

Aret. Rispondetemi prima. I nudi di Rafaello, sono eglino storpiati: sono nani, sono troppo carnosi: sono secchi, hanno i muscoli fuor di luogo, o altra parte cattiva? Fab. Ho inteso da tutti, che stanno bene: ma che non si contiene in loro quell’arte, che si vede in quelli di Michel’Agnolo.

Aret. Eche arte e questa?

Fab. Non hanno que’ bei dintorni, c’hanno i nudi de quest’altro. Aret. Quai sono questi bei dintorni? Fab. Quei, che formano quelle belle gambe, quei be’ piedi, mani, schiene, pancie, e tutto il resto.

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 173 FORTY-FIVE

figure of Michelangelo’s sees them all. One should notice, however, that Michelangelo has adopted the most fearsome and complicated type of nude, and Raphael the most appealing and graceful one. Hence some people have compared Michelangelo to Dante, and Raphael to Petrarch. Fab. Do not go smothering me with comparisons of this kind—even though they work out in my favor; for in Dante there is substance and instruction, and in Petrarch only delicacy of style and poetic ornament. Which leads me to recall that there was a Minorite friar who preached in Venice many years ago. Citing these two poets from time to time, he used to call Dante “Sir September” and Petrarch “Sir May” in allusion to the seasons in question, one packed with fruits and the other with flowers. But put yourself in front of a nude of Michelangelo’s and a second one by Raphael and first give them both a full consideration; then speak out your decision as to which of the two is more perfect. Aret. I tell you that Raphael knew how to do every type of nude well, whereas Michelangelo achieves excellent results with only one type. And Raphael’s nudes have this additional quality: they give greater pleasure. Nor shall I say, as a man of fine intelligence once did, that Michelangelo has painted porters and Raphael men of class. For in fact, as I said earlier, Raphael has produced figures of every type, both agreeable ones and also fearsome and elaborate ones, with at the same time more temperate and gentler actions. By nature, however, he was a lover of refinement and delicacy, just as he was also most refined and most courteous in his manners, so that he was no less universally loved for the fact that his figures pleased everyone. Fab. It is not enough to say that this nude is as beautiful and perfect as that one. You need to prove the point. Aret. Answer me this first: Raphael’s nudes, are they deformed, are they dwarfish? Are they too fleshy, are they desiccated? Do they have their muscles in the wrong places, or any other bad element in them? Fab. I have been given to understand by everyone that they stand up well, but do not embody that artistry which is to be seen in those of Michelangelo. Aret. And what artistry is this? Fab. They do not have those fine contours which this other man’s nudes possess. Aret. What are these “fine contours’’? Fab. The ones which go to the making of these lovely legs, these beautiful feet, hands, backs, bellies and all of the rest.

174 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-SIX

Aret. Dunque non pare a voi, o a fautori di Michel’Agnolo, che i nudi di Rafaello hebbiano queste belle parti? Fab. Dico non pur belle, ma bellissime: ma non, quanto i nudi di Michel’Agnolo. Aret. La regola di giudicar questo bello di donde la cavate voi? Fab. Stimo, che si debba cavar (come havete detto) dal vivo, e dalle statue de gliantichi.

Aret. Confesserete adunque, che i nudi di Rafaello hanno ogni bella e perfetta parte: perche egli di rado fece cosa, nella quale non imitasse il vivo, 0 l’antico. Onde si veggono nelle sue figure teste, gambe, torsi, braccia, e piedi, e mani stupendissime.

Fab. Non dimostrod l’ossature, le maccature, e certi nervetti e minutezze, quanto ha fatto Michel’Agnolo.

Aret. Egli ha dimostro queste parti nelle figure, che lo ricercavano, quanto si ricercava, e Michel’Agnolo (e sia detto senza sua offesa) alle volte piu di quello, che si conviene. Ilche si vede cosi chiaramente, che sopra cio non accade, che si dica altro. Poi vi dovete ricordare, ch’io v’ho detto, ch’é di assai maggiore importanza vestir l’ossa di carne polposa e tenera, che iscorticarle: e, che cio sia vero, replico, che gliantichi per la maggior parte hanno fatte le loro figure dolci, e con pochi ricercamenti. Ma non per questo Rafaello é sempre rimaso su la delicatezza: anzi, come s’é detto, le sue figure variando, ha fatto nudi ricercati secondo il bisogno: come si vede nelle Historie delle sue battaglie, nella figura di quel vecchio portato dal figliuolo, & in diverse altre: ma non s’invaghi molto di questa maniera: a guisa di quello, che haveva posto ogni suo intento (come parte principalissima del Pittore) in dilettare, ricercando piu tosto nome di leggiadro, che di

terribile, e ne acquistO insieme un’altro, che fu chiamato gratioso: percioche oltre la inventione: oltre al disegno: oltre alla varieta: oltre che le sue cose tutte movono sommamente: si trova in loro quella parte, che havevano, come scrive Plinio, le figure di Apelle: e questa é la venusta, che é quel non so che, che tanto suole aggradire, cosi ne’ Pittori, come ne’ Poeti, in guisa, che empie I’animo altrui d’infinito diletto, non sapendo da qual parte esca quello, che a noi tanto piace. Laqual parte

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 175 FORTY-SIX

Aret. So it does not seem to you or to partisans of Michelangelo that Raphael’s nudes possess these beautiful elements?

Fab. I call them not just lovely, but extremely beautiful—yet not to the same degree as Michelangelo’s nudes. Aret. From where do you get your criterion for judging this matter of beauty?

Fab. I believe that it should be derived (as you have said) from the life and from the statues of the ancients.

Aret. In that case you will have to admit that Raphael’s nudes are beautiful and perfect in every respect; for he rarely produced anything in which he did not imitate the life or the antique. As a result there appear on his figures heads, legs, torsos, arms and feet and hands which are absolutely marvellous. Fab. He did not bring out the bone structure, the fleshy areas and certain small sinews and details to the degree that Michelangelo has done. Aret. He has brought out these elements, in the figures which asked to be treated this way, to the required degree; whereas Michelangelo (and be this said without offense to him) sometimes went beyond what is appropriate here. This is so clearly perceptible that the subject leaves no room for saying anything else. Again, you should remember how I told

you that dressing the bones in pulpy and tender flesh is a good deal more important than laying them bare. And to emphasize the truth of this, I repeat that the ancients for the most part made their figures soft and gave them few elaborations. But Raphael did not on this account invariably depend on delicacy. Rather, in diversifying his figures, as I have said, he produced elaborate nudes as the need arose. One sees examples of this

in the narrative layout of his battle pieces, in the figure of the old man carried by his son, and in a variety of other figures. Yet he felt no great love for this mode, like a man who had directed his every bent towards giving pleasure (regarding this as the painter’s foremost resource) and in seeking a reputation for delicacy rather than awesomeness simultaneously acquired another reputation, which went under the name of attractiveness. For beyond invention, beyond design, beyond variety and beyond the fact that his works are all supremely moving, one finds in them that element which, according to Pliny, the figures of Apelles possessed—charm, that is, that indefinable presence which customarily proves so attractive with painters no less than with poets, operating in such a way that it fills another person’s being with infinite delight, without his knowing from what quarter this element comes, which affords us so much pleasure. When Petrarch

176 Dolce’s ‘Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-SEVEN

considerata dal Petrarca (mirabile e gentil Pittore delle bellezze e delle virtt di Madonna Laura) lo mosse a cosi cantare. E un non so che ne gliocchi, che in un punto Po far chiara la notte, oscuro il die, E’l mele amaro, & addolcir l’ascentio.

Fab. Questa, che voi dite venusta, é detta da Greci charis, che io esporrei sempre per gratia. Aret. Seppe ancora il gran Rafaello fare iscortar le figure, quando egli volle, e perfettamente: senza, che io vi ritorno a dire, che in tutte le sue opere egli uso una varieta tanto mirabile, che non é figura, che ne d’aria ne di movimento si somigli, tal che in cio non appare

ombra di quello, che da Pittori hoggi in mala parte é chiamata maniera, cioé cattiva pratica; ove si veggono forme e volti quasi sempre simili. E, si come Michel’Agnolo ha ricerco sempre in tutte le sue opere la difficulta: cosi Rafaello all’incontro la facilita; parte, come io dissi, difficile a conseguire: & halla ottenuta in modo, che par, che le sue cose siano fatte senza pensarvi, e non affaticate, ne istentate: ilche é segno di grandissima perfettione: come anco ne gli Scrittori, che i migliori sono i piu facili: come appresso voi dotti Virgilio, Cicerone, & appresso noi il Petrarca, e l’Ariosto. Quanto alla parte del movere, non ne voglio dire altro di quello, c’ho tocco, in caso, che voi non diceste, che le sue figure non movano. Fab. Questo non niego io. Ma voi che dite di quelle di Michel’Agnolo? Aret. Io non ne voglio parlare: percioche questa é parte, che possono giudicar parimente tutti: ne io vorrei col mio dire offenderlo. Fab. Dunque venite al colorito. Aret. Emestiero, che consideriamo prima l’huomo vestito. Fab. In cio non dite altro; che io so, che’l panneggiar di Rafaello é piu lodato, che quello di

ce

Michel’Agnolo: forse per questo, che Rafaello ha piu studiato nel vestir le figure, e Michel’Agnolo nel fare i nudi.

Aret. Anzi Rafaello fu studioso nell’una cosa e nell’altra, e Michel’Agnolo nell’ultima sola. E cosi potete (mi credo io) hoggimai vedere che fra questi due

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 177 FORTY-SEVEN

(a wonderful and refined painter of the beauties and virtues of the Lady Laura) contemplated this same element, it moved him to write the following verses: And in her eyes an indefinable power To lighten night in a trice and darken day, To sweeten wormwood and turn honey sour.

Fab. What you call “charm” here is called charis by the Greeks, which I would always interpret as “grace.” Aret. The great Raphael also knew how to show the figures in foreshortening when he wanted this, and could do it to perfection. But there is no call for me to go back to telling you that he practiced such a marvellous variety in all of his works that there is no figure which is like any other, either in expression or in movement; and hence there appears here no shadow of what painters today derogatively call “mannerism’’—that is to say, bad practice, where the forms and faces one sees are almost always alike. And just as Michelangelo has always made difficulty his objective in all of his works, so Raphael’s objective was the opposite one of ease. It is an element hard to achieve, as I said, and he has laid hold of it in such a way that his works appear to have been produced without thought. Nor do they look labored or overdone, which is a mark of the

highest perfection. For the best artists are the easiest ones, a point which is true of writers as well, such as Virgil and Cicero among men of learning like you and Petrarch and Ariosto among people like me. As for the question of stirring the emotions, I do not intend to say anything more here than what I have already intimated, assuming you do not deny that his figures do move one. Fab. I make no such denial. But what do you say of those of Michelangelo? Aret. I do not want to speak of them. For this is a matter which all alike can make wp their minds about; nor would J wish to offend him with what I say. Fab. Then move on to color. Aret. First we need to consider the clothed figure. Fab. Say no more on this subject; for I know that Raphael’s draperies come in for higher praise than those of Michelangelo, the reason perhaps being that Raphael attended to the clothing of figures more intensively, and Michelangelo to the execution of nudes. Aret. In fact Raphael was attentive both in one case and in the other, and Michelangelo only in the latter case. And so you can (in my belief) see from now on that there is equality

178 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-EIGHT

nel disegno ci é parita: & anco dalla parte di Rafaello maggiore eccellenza, essendo stato egli piu vario e piu universale, & havendo serbato meglio la proprieta de i sessi e de glianni;

e trovandosi nelle sue Pitture piu gratia e maggior diletto, in tanto, che non fu mai alcuno, che gli dispiacesse cosa di sua mano. E, quanto al colorito. Fab. In questo ancora assentiro con voi: pur dite via.

Aret. Supero nel colorito il gratiosissimo Rafaello tutti quelli, che dipinsero inanzi a lui, si a olio, come a fresco, & a fresco molto piu, in guisa, che ho udito dire a molti, & io ancora cosi vi affermo, che le cose dipinte in muro da Rafaello avanzano il colorito di molti buoni maestri a olio: e sono sfumate & unite con bellissimo rilevo, e con tutto quello, che puo far l’arte. Il che non cessa di predicare a ciascuno Santo cognominato Zago, Pittore nel vero espedito e valente in dipingere medesimamente a muro, et oltre a cio studioso dell’anticaglie; dellequali ve ne ha un gran numero: et molto pratico delle historie e de’ Poeti, si come quello, che si diletta di leggere infinitamente. Ne parlero altrimenti del colorito di Michel’Agnolo: perche ogni un sa, che egli in cio ha posto poca cura, e voi mi cedete. Ma Rafaello ha saputo col mezo de i colori contrafar mirabilmente qualunque cosa, e carni, e panni, e paesi, e tutto cio che puo venire inanzi al Pittore. Fece ancora ritratti dal naturale: come fu quello di Papa Giulio Secondo, di Papa Leone Decimo, e di molti gran personaggi, che sono tenuti divini. Oltre a cio fu grande Architetto: onde dopo la morte di Bramante gli fu allogata dal medesimo Papa Leone la fabrica di San Pietro e del Palagio. ilperche si veggono spesso nelle sue Pitture edifici tirati con bellissima Prospettiva. E, quello, che fu di grandissimo danno alla Pittura, mori giovane, lasciando il suo nome illustre in tutte le parti della Europa: e visse i pochi anni di sua vita (come ne posso io farvi fede, e, come scrive il Vasari con verita) non da privato, ma da Prencipe, essendo liberale della sua virtt e de i suoi danari a tutti gli studiosi dell’arte, che ne havevano alcun bisogno: e fu openione universale, che’l Papa gli volesse dare un Capello rosso. Perche oltre alla eccellenza della Pittura, haveva Rafaello ogni virtu, & ogni bel costume e gentil creanza, che conviene a gentil’huomo. Dallequali tutte cose mosso il

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 179 FORTY-EIGHT

between these two in draftsmanship, and at the same time greater excellence on the side of Raphael, in that he was more varied and universal and better observed the proprieties

of the sexes and of age, and again because more charm and greater pleasure is to be found in his paintings—so much so that there was never any man who took exception to something from his hand. And as for color—— Fab. Here again I shall agree with you. But go ahead.

Aret. Raphael with his tremendous appeal surpassed in his coloring all those who practiced painting before him, whether in oil or in fresco. And in fresco he was so far superior, that I have heard many people say what is also my own affirmation to you, namely that Raphael’s wall paintings outdo the coloring of many good masters in oils, and are tonally diffused and unified, to the accompaniment of projection of the finest kind and all that art can achieve. This is something which Santo surnamed Zago never stops proclaiming to each and all—a painter of real fluency and a talented one in this same field of wall-

painting, who besides this is a diligent student of antique objects, of which he owns a large number, and is conversant with literary narrative and the poets to a high degree, on the lines of one who takes infinite pleasure in reading. And Michelangelo’s coloring I shall not otherwise discuss. For everyone knows that he has given little attention to this, and you grant me as much. Raphael, on the other hand, knew how to counterfeit every sort of object marvellously by dint of coloring: flesh and draperies and landscapes, and everything that can present itself to the painter. He also did portraits from the life, like those of Pope Julius the Second, Pope Leo the Tenth and many grandees, which are regarded as divine. Above and beyond this he was a great architect; which is why, after

the death of Bramante, the construction of Saint Peter’s and the Papal Palace was assigned to him by the same Pope Leo. For this reason one often sees in his paintings buildings delineated in perspective in the most beautiful way. And what proved the greatest loss to painting was the fact that he died young, leaving behind him the renown of his name in every part of Europe. And he lived his short life (as I can bear witness to you, and as Vasari truthfully records) not in the style of a private individual, but in that of a prince. For he was generous with his talents and his money to all those involved in the study of painting who were in need of them in any way, and it was universally thought that the Pope wanted to give him a cardinalship. For above and beyond the excellence of his painting, Raphael possessed every faculty and every nicety of behavior and courtesy of manner which is proper in a man of class. It was all of these qualities which stirred the

180 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FORTY-NINE

Cardinal Bibbiena, lo indusse contra sua voglia a prender per moglie una sua nipote; benche egli vi mettesse tempo in mezo, ne consumasse il matrimonio, aspettando, che’l Papa, che glie ne haveva dato intentione, lo facesse Cardinale: ilqual Papa gli haveva dato ancora poco inanzi alla sua morte un’ufficio di cubiculario, grado honorevolissimo & utile. Hora potete molto bene esser chiaro, che Rafaello é stato non pur’uguale a Michel’Agnolo nella Pittura, ma superiore. Nella Scoltura € poi Michel’Agnolo unico, divino, e pari a’ gliantichi: ne in cio ha bisogno delle mie lodi, ne di quelle d’altrui. Ne anco puo esser vinto da altri, che da se stesso. Fab. Molto Signor Pietro, il vostro discorso, m’é stato grato: e di qui inanzi son’io per credere cio che credete voi, che con tali ragioni l’huomo non si puo ingannare. Ma ci é€ ancora tanto di tempo, che se non sete stanco di ragionare, mi potrete acconciamente informar della eccellenza di qualche altro Pittore.

Aret. Jo non mi soglio stancare per cosi piccioli ragionamenti: e questo ancora é cosa, ch’io v’ho promesso, ne voglio mancar di favellarvi ancora di alcuni, accioche veggiate, che i cieli a nostri di ci sono stati cosi favorevoli nella Pittura, come nelle lettere. Dico adunque,

che Leonardo Vinci fu pari in tutte le cose a Michel’Agnolo: ma haveva uno ingegno tanto elevato, che non si contentava mai di cio, che e’ faceva. E come, che tutto facesse bene, era stupendissimo in far cavalli. Fu appresso Pittor di grande stima, ma di maggiore aspettatione Giorgio da Castelfranco, di cui si veggono alcune cose a olio vivacissime e sfumate tanto, che non ci si scorgono ombre. Mori questo valente huomo di peste, con non poco danno della Pittura. Fu ancora gran Pittore Giulio Romano, ilquale dimostro molto ben con gli effetti di essere stato degno discepolo del Divino Rafaello non solo nella Pittura, ma anco nell’Architettura. Onde fu carissimo a Federico Duca di Mantova: nella quale egli dipinse molte cose, tutte lodatissime; & ornd Mantova di bellissimi edifici. Era Giulio bell’inventore, buon disegnatore, e coloriva benissimo. Ma fu vinto di colorito, e di piu gentil maniera da Antonio da Correggio, leggiadrissimo maestro: di cui in Parma si veggono Pitture di tanta bellezza,

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 181 FORTY-NINE

Cardinal Bibbiena into persuading the artist, against his will, to marry one of his nieces. And even then Raphael put off the matter for a time and did not consummate the marriage, in the expectation that the Pope, who had given him notice that this was his intention, would make him a cardinal. This was the same Pope who had also conferred on him, shortly before his death, a post as chamberlain—a very honorable and serviceable title.

You can now see for yourself very clearly indeed that Raphael was not just Michelangelo’s equal in painting, but his superior. In sculpture, I should add, Michelangelo is unique, divine and on a par with the ancients; and there he has no need either of my praises or anyone else’s. Nor can others outdo him, furthermore; he can only outdo himself.

Fab. Sir, your talk has given me great pleasure; and from now I am for believing what you believe yourself; for man cannot deceive himself with such reasons to go by. But there is still time left over in which, if you are not tired of arguing, you could appropriately acquaint me with the excellence of some other painter. Aret. It is not customary for me to be tired by such brief discussions; and there is also this to consider, that I have made you a promise and do not want to forgo going on to tell you about some of these artists, so that you may see that heaven in our time has proved just as beneficent in painting as it has in literature. I tell you then that Leonardo da Vinci was Michelangelo’s equal in everything, but had such a lofty genius that he never rested content with what he produced. And though he did everything well, he was absolutely marvellous at doing horses. After him came Giorgione of Castelfranco, a painter who made a great mark, but promised even more. One sees certain works by him in oils which are extremely lively and have such a degree of

sfumato that shadows are not discernible. This talented man died of the plague, with no small loss to painting. Another outstanding painter was Giulio Romano, who with the effects he produced very properly showed himself to have been a worthy disciple of the godlike Raphael, not only in painting, but also in architecture. Hence he was held in the greatest affection by Federico, Duke of Mantua—a city in which he did many paintings, all of them most praiseworthy, and which he embellished with buildings of great beauty. Giulio was a fine inventor, a good designer and an excellent colorist. But he was outdone by the coloring and the softer style of Antonio da Correggio, a master of very great delicacy. One sees paintings of his in Parma which are of such great beauty

182 Dolce’s “’Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento FIFTY

che par, che non si possa disiderar meglio. E vero, che fu piu bello coloritore, che disegnatore. Ma che vi diré io di Francesco Parmigiano? Diede costui certa vaghezza alle cose sue, che fanno inamorar chiunque le riguarda. Oltre a cio coloriva politamente: e fu tanto leggiadro et accurato nel disegnare, che ogni suo disegno lasciato in carta mette stupore ne gliocchi di chi lo mira: percioche vi si vede una diligenza mirabile. Mori giovane ancora egli: e fu affettionatissimo alle cose & al nome di Rafaello. Dicevasi ancora (come parimente scrive il Vasari) in Roma, che l’anima di Rafaello gli era entrata nel corpo: perche si vedevano ambedue conformi d’ingegno e di costumi: essendo, che il Parmigiano fu incolpato a torto, ch’egli attendesse all’Alchimia; percioche non fu mai Filosofo, che piu sprezzasse i danari, e le faculta di quello, che faceva egli. E di cio ne fa fede M. Battista da Parma suo creato, Scultore eccellente, e molti altri. Hora camina per le sue vestigie Girolamo Mazzola suo cugino, honoratissimamente, e con molta fama. Fab. Questo Parmigiano, che comunemente é detto il Parmigianino: é percerto molto lodato.

Aret. Fu anco Polidoro da Caravaggio grande e raro Pittore, bellissimo inventore, pratico et ispedito disegnatore, e molto imitator delle cose antiche. E vero, ch’egli non riusciva nel colorito; e le sue cose eccellenti sono di chiaro e scuro a fresco. Ma, guel che é cosa maravigliosa, era Polidoro in eta poco meno di vent’uno o di ventidue anni, quando comincid a imparar l’arte: ilche fu sotto di Rafaello. E mori ancora egli pur giovane, ucciso miserabilmente in Messina (per torgli alcuni danari) da un suo rubaldo garzone, che fu poi nella medesima citta meritamente isquartato. Fab. Io comincio bene a vedere, che Michel’Agnolo nella Pittura non é solo.

Aret. Andrea del Sarto hebbe altresi gran perfettione in quest’arte: e piacquero le sue cose infinitamente a Franceso Re di Francia. Ne Perino del Vaga é degno di poca laude. Cosi

hanno i Pittori sempre molto stimate le opere di Antonio da Pordonone: ilquale fu ancora egli pratico e spedito maestro, e dilettossi di scorti e di figure terribili. Di suo si veggono in Vinegia alcune cose a fresco bellissime: come nella facciata della casa del Talenti un Mercurio, che scorta bene, una battaglia, & un cavallo, che sono molto lodati, & una Proserpina in braccio di Plutone: che e una leggiadra figura. Veggonsi anco

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 183 FIFTY

that it seems that one could not wish for better. It is true that he was a finer colorist than draftsman. But what shall I say to you about Francesco Parmigiano? This man endowed his creations with a certain loveliness which makes whoever looks at them fall in love with them. Above and beyond this he was a refined colorist, and so delicate and accurate in his draftsmanship that every design of his that is preserved on paper brings astonishment to the eyes of the admirer; for one sees there an admirable attentiveness. He too died young, and was most attached to Raphael’s works and reputation. It was even said in Rome (as Vasari also records) that Raphael’s soul had entered into his body, for the two were seen to be alike in intellect and in habits. The fact is, indeed, that Parmigiano was wrongfully faced with the charge that he practiced alchemy; for there never was a philosopher who despised money and the talents of the men who make it more than he did. His pupil, Messer Battista of Parma, an excellent sculptor, bears witness to this and so do many others. And today his cousin Girolamo Mazzola treads in his footsteps most honorably and with great renown. Fab. There is certainly great praise for this Parmigiano, commonly known as Parmigianino. Aret. Polidoro da Caravaggio too was an outstanding and exceptional painter, a very fine inventor, an experienced and fluent draftsman, and a considerable imitator of the antique. It is true that he did not succeed as a colorist, and that the works of his which excel are chiaroscuro frescoes. But here is the astonishing thing: Polidoro was a little less than twenty-one or twenty-two years old when he began to learn about art—which he did

under Raphael. And he too was still young when he died—murdered in Messina in wretched fashion (to get a few pence out of him) by a rascally manservant of his, who was subsequently slaughtered in that same city, and quite rightly too.

Fab. I am certainly beginning to see that Michelangelo does not stand alone in painting. Aret. Andrea del Sarto also achieved great perfection in this art, and his works gave infinite pleasure to King Francis the First of France. Nor is the praise that Perino del Vaga deserves inconsiderable. Similarly painters have always looked with great esteem on the works of Antonio da Pordenone; he too was an experienced and fluent master, and was fond of foreshortenings and fearsome figures. Certain very beautiful works of his in fresco are to be seen in Venice: on the fagade of the Casa del Talenti, for example, there is a Mercury which is well foreshortened, a battle scene and a horse which receive great praise, and a figure of Proserpine clasped by Pluto which is a delicate one. Also to be

184 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FIFTY-ONE

nella cappella grande della Chiesa di San Rocco un Dio Padre con alcuni Angioli nel cielo,

e certi Dottori & Evangelisti, che gli diedero uma gran fama. Ne bisognava, ch’egli fosse punto minore, havendo a concorrer con Titiano nostro, dal quale rimase sempre di gran lunga lontano. Ne é maraviglia: percioche in costui solo veramente (e sia

detto con pace de glialtri Pittori) si veggono raccolte a perfettione tutte le parti eccellenti, che si sono trovate divise in molti: essendo, che d’inventione, ne di disegno niuno 10 supero giamai. Poi di colorito non fu mai alcuno, che a lui arrivasse. Anzi a Titiano solo si dee dare la gloria del perfetto colorire. laquale 0 non hebbe alcun de

gliantichi: o se ’hebbe, mancé a chi piu, a chi manco, in tutti i moderni: percioche, come io dissi, egli camina di pari con la Nattura: onde ogni sua figura é viva, si muove, é le carni tremano. Non ha dimostro Titiano nelle sue opere vaghezza vana, ma proprieta convenevole di colori: non ornamenti affettati, ma sodezza da maestro, non crudezza, ma il pastoso e tenero della Natura: e nelle cose sue combattono e scherzano sempre i lumi

con l’ombre, e perdono e diminuiscono con quell’istesso modo, che fa la medesima Natura. Fab. (Questo istesso odo dire da tutti. Aret. Si conosce anco chiaramente, che la Natura lo fece Pittore. Perche essendo egli nato in Cadore di honoratissimi parenti, fu mandato dal padre a Vinegia picciolo fanciullo di nove anni in casa d’un suo fratello, che qui attendeva alla cura di uno di quegli honorati uffici, che si danno a cittadini, affine, che egli lo mettesse ad apparare a dipingere, havendo veduto in lui in quella eta tenera d’intorno a quest’arte chiarissimi lumi d’ingegno. Fab. Molto m’é a grado d’intender qualche particolarita di questo singolarissimo Pittore. Aret. I] Zio adunque subito condusse il fanciullo alla casa di Sebastiano, padre del gentilissimo Valerio e di Francesco Zuccati, unichi maestri nell’arte del Musaico, ridotta da loro in quella eccellenza, nella quale hoggidi si veggono le buone Pitture: perche esso gli desse i principii dell’arte. Ma da questo fu rimesso il fanciullo a Gentil Bellino fratello di Giovanni, ma a lui molto inferiore: che allhora insieme col fratello lavorava nella sala del gran consiglio. Ma Titiano, essendo spinto dalla Natura a maggiori

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 185 FIFTY-ONE

seen in the main chapel of the Church of San Rocco are a God the Father in heaven with some angels, and certain Church Doctors and Evangelists, which gave him a great reputation. And his level needed to be not the least bit lower than this, since he had our Titian to compete with and always remained at a wide remove from him. No wonder, too, for

truly it is in Titian alone (and let the other painters take my saying this in good part) that one sees gathered together to perfection all of the excellent features which have individually been present in many cases. Both in terms of invention and in terms of draftsmanship, that is, no one ever surpassed him. And again, as regards coloring, there was never anyone who reached his level. Titian alone, in fact, should be awarded the palm for perfect coloring. Either no single one of the ancients achieved this, or, if one of them did achieve it, it proved to be more or less wanting in all of the moderns. For Titian, as I said, moves in step with nature, so that every one of his figures has life, movement and flesh which palpitates. He has shown in his works no empty gracefulness, but a palette which is properly appropriate; no artificiality of ornamentation, but a masterly concreteness; no crudity, but the mellowness and softness of nature. And the highlights and shadows

in his creations always contend and interplay with one another, and fade out and decrease in the very same way as nature itself has them do. Fab. Everyone, in my experience, makes this same point. Aret. It is also clearly recognized that nature made him a painter. For he was born in Cadore of most distinguished parents, and as a young boy of nine his father sent him to Venice to stay with a brother of his. The latter was engaged here in doing the duties attached to one of those distinguished posts which are given out to citizens, and the idea was for him to put Titian out to learn painting; for he had seen signs of genius where this art is concerned shining out very clearly in Titian at that tender age. Fab. Hearing certain details about this most exceptional painter affords me great pleasure. Aret. At once, therefore, the uncle took the boy along to where the Zuccati lived—Sebastiano, the father of Valerio, that very courteous man, and Francesco; these last are unique in their mastery of the art of mosaic, and have brought it to the level of excellence which characterizes good paintings today. The idea was for Sebastiano to impart to Titian the basic principles of art. He, however, sent the boy on to Gentile Bellini—the brother of

Giovanni, but much inferior to him—who was working along with his brother in the Sala del Gran Consiglio at that time. But Titian, propelled by nature as he was to greater

a

186 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FIFTY-TWO

grandezze, & alla perfettione di quest’arte, non poteva sofferir di seguitar quella via secca e stentata di Gentile, ma disegnava gagliardamente e con molta prestezza. Onde gli fu detto da Gentile, che egli non era per far profitto nella Pittura, veggendo che molto si allagarva dalla sua strada. Per questo Titiano lasciando quel goffo Gentile, hebbe mezo di accostarsi a Giovanni Bellino: ma ne anco quella maniera compiutamente piacendogli, elesse Giorgio da Castel franco. Disegnando adunque Titiano e dipingendo con Giorgione (che cosi era chiamato) venne in poco tempo cosi valente nell’arte, che dipingendo Giorgione la faccia del fondaco de’ Tedeschi, che riguarda sopra il Canal grande, fu allogata a Titiano, come dicemmo, quell’altra, che soprasta alla merceria, non havendo egli alhora a pena venti anni. Nella quale vi fece una Giudit mirabilissima di disegno e di colorito, a tale, che credendosi comunemente, (poi che ella fu discoverta) che ella fosse opera di Giorgione, tutti i suoi amici seco si rallegravano come della miglior cosa di gran lunga, ch’egli havesse fatto. Onde Giorgione con grandissimo suo dispiacere, rispondeva, ch’era di mano del discepolo; ilquale dimostrava gia di avanzare il Maestro, e (che é piu) stette alcune giorni in casa, come disperato: veggendo, che un giovanetto sapeva piu di lui.

Fab. Intendo, che Giorgione hebbe a dire, che Titiano insino nel ventre di sua madre era

Pittore. Aret. Non passo molto, che gli fu data a dipingere una gran tavola all’altar grande della Chiesa

de’ Frati Minori: ove Titiano pur giovanetto dipinse a olio la Vergine, che ascende al Cielo, fra molti Angioli, che l’accompagnano, e di sopra lei affiguro un Dio Padre attorniato da due Angioli. Par veramente che ella ascenda, con un volto pien di humilta; e il panno vola leggiadramente. Nel piano sono gli Apostoli, che con diverse attitudini dimos-

trano allegrezza e stupore, e sono per la maggior parte maggiori del vivo. E certo in questa tavola si contiene la grandeza e terribilita di Michel’Agnolo, la piacevolezza e venusta di Rafaello, & il colorito proprio della Natura. E tuttavia questa fu la prima opera publica, ch’egli a oglio facesse: e la fece in pochissimo tempo, e giovanetto. Con tutto cio i Pittori goffi, e lo sciocco volgo, che insino alhora non havevano veduto altro, che le cose morte e fredde di Giovanni Bellino, di Gentile, e del Vivarino (perche

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 187 FIETY-TWO

heights and the perfecting of this art, could not bear to follow that arid and labored line of Gentile’s. Instead, he made designs boldly and with great rapidity. When Gentile saw, therefore, that Titian was diverging considerably from his own track, he told him that

there was no prospect of his making good as a painter. This gave Titian occasion to leave that clodhopper Gentile and attach himself to Giovanni Bellini; but the latter’s style did not entirely please him either, and he sought out Giorgio of Castelfranco. The resultant experience of drawing and painting alongside Giorgione (that was his sobriquet) led in a short space of time to such artistic prowess on Titian’s part that, when Giorgione came to paint the facade of the Fondaco de’ Tedeschi which looks out over the Grand Canal, that other section which overlooks the Merceria was, as I said before, assigned to Titian, who was not even twenty at the time. There, on this facade, he created a Judith which is most wonderful in its design and coloring—so much so that (once it was unveiled) it was commonly supposed that it was the work of Giorgione, and all of the latter’s friends were treating it as far and away the best thing that he had done and offering him their congratulations on this score. Whereupon Giorgione would answer, most regretfully, that it was from the hand of a pupil who was already showings signs of outdistancing his master. What is more, he also stayed at home for several days, as if in despair at the recognition that a young man was more capable than he was. Fab. JI understand that Giorgione used to say that Titian was a painter even in his mother’s womb.

Aret. Not long after, the execution of a large canvas for the high altar of the Church of the Frati Minori was put into his hands. Here Titian, a young man even now, painted in oils the Virgin ascending to heaven amongst many escorting angels; and above Her he did a figure of God the Father, flanked by a pair of angels. Truly She appears to ascend with humility written all over Her face; and Her drapery flutters delicately. At ground level there are the Apostles, who display gladness and amazement with a variety of poses, and are mostly more than life-size. And certainly the grandeur and awesomeness of Michelangelo, the charm and loveliness of Raphael and the coloring proper to nature are incorporated into this painting. It was, nevertheless, the first public commission that Titian carried out in oils; and he did it in the shortest space of time, and in his youth. All of which meant that the clumsy artists and dimwit masses, who had seen up till then nothing but the dead and cold creations of Giovanni Bellini, Gentile and Vivarino (the fact

188 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FIFTY-THREE

Giorgione nel lavorare a olio non haveva ancora havuto lavoro publico; e per lo piu non faceva altre opere, che meze figure, e ritratti) lequali erano senza movimento, e senza

tilevo: dicevano della detta tavola un gran male. Dipoi raffreddandosi la invidia, & aprendo loro a poco la verita gliocchi, cominciarono le genti a stupir della nuova maniera trovata in Vinegia da Titiano: e tutti i Pittori d’indi in poi si affaticarono d’imitarla; ma per esser fuori della strada loro, rimanevano smarriti. E certo si puo attribuire a miracolo, che Titiano senza haver veduto alhora le anticaglie di Roma, che furono lume a tutti i Pittori eccellenti, solamente con quella poca favilluccia, ch’egli haveva scoperta nelle cose di Giorgione, vide e conobbe la Idea del dipingere perfettamente.

Fab. E proverbio de’ Greci antichi, che a tutti non é dato ire a Corintho. E voi havete detto, che’l dipingere bene é cosa da pochi.

Aret. Haveva hoggimai Titiano per le sue opere acquistata tanta fama, che non era gentilhuomo in Vinegia, che non procurasse di haver qualche ritratto o altra inventione di sua mano: e gli fur date a fare in piu Chiese diverse opere. Come nella medesima de’ frati Minori da que’ chiarissimi gentilhuomini da Ca Pesaro una tavola all’ altare; ove & un

pilo per l’acqua santa con una figurina di marmo di San Giovanni Battista, fatta dal sansovino. Nella qual tavola fece Titiano una Madonna, che siede col fanciullo: ilquale tiene una delle gambe leggiadramente alzata, e posa il pié dell’altra sopra I’una delle mani della Madonna. Inanzi alla quale é un San Pietro di aspetto venerabile, che volto a lei, mette l’una mano sopra un libro aperto, che tiene nell’altra mano, e le chiavi gli sono presso a piedi. Evvi un San Francesco, & un’armato con una bandiera, con alcuni ritratti de’ Pesari, che paion veri. Di dentro il Chiostro nella Chiesa di San Nicolao fece all’altar grande una imagine di detto Santo, ch’é figura principale, vestito con un pivial d’oro, ove si vede il lustro e l’asprezza dell’oro, che par veramente intessuto. e da un lato v’e una Santa Caterina con un volger leggiadro, nel viso & in ogni sua parte divina. E dall’altro un San Sebastiano ignudo di bellissima forma, e con una tinta di carne cosi simile alla vera, che non par dipinto, ma vivo. Ilqual San Sebastiano essendo il Pordonone andato a vedere, hebbe a dire, io stimo,

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 189 FIFTY-THREE

being that Giorgione had not yet received a public commission for a work in oils, and that his creations were mostly limited to half-figures and portraits)—-works which had no movement and no projection—grossly maligned this same picture. Later the envy cooled off, and the truth, little by little, opened people’s eyes, so that they began to marvel at the new style opened up by Titian in Venice. And from then on all of the artists were at pains to imitate it; but because this took them off their beaten track, they never found their bearings. And certainly one can speak of a miracle at work in the fact that, without as yet having seen the antiquities of Rome, which were a source of enlightenment to all excellent painters, and purely by dint of that little tiny spark which he had uncovered in the works of Giorgione, Titian discerned and apprehended the essence of perfect painting.

Fab. According to the ancient Greek proverb, it does not fall to everyone’s lot to make the journey to Corinth. And you have said that painting well comes within the range of few. Aret. By now Titian’s works had won him so great a reputation that there was not a nobleman in Venice who did not take care to possess some portrait or other invention of his making; and the execution of various works in a number of churches was assigned to him. For example: Those most eminent noblemen of the Casa Pesaro commissioned a painting for the altar in the same church of the Frati Minori, by which there is a holy water basin

with a marble figure of St. John the Baptist sculpted by Sansovino. Titian put into this painting a Virgin sitting with Her Child, who holds one of His legs in a delicate lifted position and rests the foot of the other on one of the Madonna’s hands. Forward of Her there is a St. Peter, venerable in appearance; turned towards Her, he places one hand on an open book which he holds in the other hand, and the keys lie beside his feet. One sees a figure of St. Francis there and a man in armor with a standard, along with certain portraits of the Pesaro family which have the ring of truth. For the high altar within the cloister in the Church of San Nicolao, he did a representation of the saint in question. He is the main figure, dressed in a golden cope where one sees the glint and harshness of the gold, which seems genuinely woven in. To one side there is a St. Catherine with a delicate turning movement, divine in her facial appearance and every one of her parts; and on the other side there is a nude St. Sebastian with an extreme beauty of form and a flesh tint of such verisimilitude that he seems not painted, but alive. After going to see this same St. Sebastian, Pordenone was, I believe, led to say

a

190 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FIFTY-FOUR

che Titiano in quel nudo habbia posto carne, e non colori. Sono altre figure perfettissime

piu lontane. E paiono quasi tutte intente a una Vergine, ch’e finta ad alto con alcuni Angioli. Et ogni figura dimostra honesta e santita inestimabile. Senza che la testa del San Nicolao é veramente miracolosa, e piena d’infinita maesta. Fab. Ho vedute piu volte tutte queste opere: e sono divine: ne le potrebbono haver fatte altre mani. Aret. Nella Chiesa di Santa Maria Maggiore fece una tavoletta d’un San Giovanni Battista nel

Deserto: di cui credasi pure, che non fu mai veduta cosa piu bella, ne migliore ne di disegno, ne di colorito. In San Giovanni e Paolo fece la tavola del San Pietro martire

caduto in terra, con l’assassino, che alza il braccio per ferirlo, & un frate, che fugge, con alcuni Angioletti in aria, che vengono giu, come con la corona del martirio, & una macchia di paese con certi arbori di Sambuco: lequali tutte cose sono di tanta perfettione, che si possono piu tosto invidiare, che imitare. Mostra il Frate di fuggire con un volto pieno di spavento; e par, che si senta gridare, & il movimento é gagliardissimo: come di quello, che haveva paura da dovero. senza, che il panno é fatto con una maniera, che in altri non se ne vede esempio. La faccia del San Pietro contiene quella pallidezza, che hanno i volti di coloro, che si avicinano alla morte, e il Santo sporge fuori un braccio & una mano di qualita, che si puo ben dire, che la Natura sia vinta dall’arte. Ne mi estendo a narrarvi le bellezze della inventione, del disegno, e del colorito; perche elle sono a voi & a tutti note. Cosi essendo Titiano ancora molto giovane, il Senato gli diede honesta provisione: & egli dipinse nella Sala da me piu volte ricordata la historia di Federico Barbarossa; quando, como io dissi, bacia il piede al Papa: e dall’altra parte della detta Sala una battaglia; ove ci sono diverse forme di soldati, cavalli, & altre cose notabilissime, e fra le altre una giovane, che essendo caduta in un fosso, uscendo si attiene alla sponda con uno isporger di gamba naturalissimo, e la gamba non par, che sia Pittura, ma carne istessa. Voi vedete bene, che queste opere io le trascorro: percioche a voler solo raccontar le parti piu eccellenti, bisognerebbe logorare in cio tutto un giorno. La fama di Titiano non si rinchiuse fra i termini di Vinegia: ma allargandosi diffusamente

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 191 FIFTY-FOUR

that Titian had put flesh and not colors onto this nude. There are other figures of the greatest perfection further off; and almost all of them seem to have their attention fixed on the Virgin, depicted with some angels on high. Every figure, too, displays inestimable

modesty and holiness, not to mention the fact that the head of the St. Nicolao is truly miraculous and full of boundless majesty.

Fab. I have seen all of these works several times, and they are divine; nor could other hands have created them. Aret. In the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore he did a small painting of St. John the Baptist in the wilderness; here one may really believe that nothing more beautiful, or better in its design or its coloring, was ever seen. In Santi Giovanni e Paolo he did the painting of St.

Peter the Martyr fallen to the ground, with his assassin raising his arm to strike him down and a monk running away. There are also some little angels in the air, coming down as though with the martyr’s crown, and a painterly piece of landscape with some elder trees—all of which elements are of such great perfection that they can sooner be envied than imitated. The monk is shown running away, with a face that has terror all over it; one has the impression of hearing a shriek, and his movement has the extreme vigor of aman who is afraid for good reason—not to mention the fact that his clothing is depicted in a style which one does not see exemplified elsewhere. The face of St. Peter embodies that pallor found on the faces of those who are close to death, and the saint reaches out an arm and a hand of such quality that one may well say that nature has been outdone by art. I refrain from going on further and telling you about the beauties of the invention, the design and the coloring; for they are known to you and to everyone. Accordingly, while Titian was still very young the Senate gave him an honorific commission; and he painted, in the Sala which I have mentioned several times, the moment in the story of Federico Barbarossa when, as I said before, Barbarossa kisses the Pope’s foot. And on the other side of this same Sala he did a battle scene, in which there appear soldiers and horses in a variety of forms, and other extremely notable features. The latter include a young woman who has fallen into a ditch and is climbing out: she uses the bank for support with a stretch of the leg which is highly natural, and the leg gives the

impression not of painting, but of actual flesh. You surely notice that I am skimming over these works; for the fact is that, if one merely wanted to give an account of the most excellent features, one would need to expend an entire day on this project. Titian’s fame did not confine itself within the bounds of Venice, but spread far and wide

192 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento FIFTY-FIVE

per la Italia, fece vaghi di haver delle sue fatiche molti Signori: tra quali fu Alfonso Duca di Ferrara, Federico Duca di Mantova, et ancora Francesco Maria Duca d’Urbino, e mollti altri. E pervenuta in Roma, mosse Papa Leone a invitarlovi con honoratissimi partiti, perche Roma altre alle Pitture di Rafaello e di Michel’Agnolo, havesse qualche cosa divina delle sue mani. Ma il gran Navagero, non meno intendente di Pittura di quello, che si fosse di Poesia: e massimamente della Latina, in cui valse tanto; veggendo, che perdendo lui, Vinegia sarebbe suta spogliata d’uno de’ suoi maggiori ornamenti, procurd, che non vi andasse. Passo ancora la sua fama in Francia: ne manco il Re Francesco di sollecitarlo con ogni grandezza di conditione, per ritirarlo a lui. ma Titiano non volle mai abandonar Vinegia, ove era venuto picciolo fanciullo, e ’/haveva eletta per sua patria. Di Carlo Quinto gia vi ho ragionato, in guisa, che io vi conchiudo, che non fu mai Pittore, che piu fosse stimato communemente da tutti i Prencipi, di quello, che sempre é stato Titiano. Vedete, che forza ha una suprema eccellenza. Fab. Dica pur chi vuole, che la virti non puo starsi nascosa: & ogni virtuoso, reggendosi con prudenza, é architetto della sua fortuna.

Aret. Certo Fabrini, che si puo dire verissimamente, che non fu giamai alcuno, che piu di Titiano desse riputatione alla Pittura. Percioche conoscendo egli il valor suo, ha sempre tenute in grandissimo pregio le sue Pitture, non si curando di dipingere, senon a grandi huomini, & a persone, che con degni premi le potessero riconoscere. E sarebbe lungo a

dire i ritratti da lui fatti: iquali sono di tanta eccellenza, che’l vivo non é piu vivo: e tutti o di Re, o d’Imperadori, o di Papi, o di Prencipi, o di altri grand’huomini. Ne fu mai in Vinegia Cardinale, 0 altro gran personaggio, che non andasse a casa di Titiano per veder le cose sue, e che non si facesse ritrarre. Sarebbe anco lungo a ragionare de’ quadri, che sono nelle stanze del Collegio; e cosi delle molte Pitture da lui fatte a Cesare, & al Re d’Inghilterra: come del quadro della Trinita: della Madonna, che piange: del Titio, del Tantalo, del Sisifo, di Andromeda, e dell’Adone; il cui esempio tosto uscira fuori in istampa di rame; e di altre historie e favole: lavori egualmente divini, si disegno, come di colorito, e d’inventione. Ma io vado

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 193 FIFTY-FIVE

through Italy, and made many nobles eager to have him work for them—including Alfonso, Duke of Ferrara, Federico, Duke of Mantua, and also Francesco Maria, Duke of Urbino, and many others. It reached Rome, too, and led Pope Leo to invite Titian there with highly distinguished proposals so that Rome should possess, above and beyond the paintings of Raphael and Michelangelo, something divine from his hand. But the great Navagero, who understood this man’s painting just as if it were poetry, and particularly Latin poetry, which was such a great forte of his, managed to prevent Titian’s going there, out of an awareness that Venice, in losing him, would be despoiled of one of its greatest adornments. His fame passed into France as well, and King Francis the First did not fail to importune Titian with every sort of lofty stipulation, in order to attract the artist to him; but Titian never wanted to give up Venice, having come there as a small boy and chosen it for his home. On Charles the Fifth I have already commented to you, and this indeed clinches my point that there never was a painter who won the general esteem of every prince to a greater extent than Titian has always done. You see what power is possessed by an excellence of the highest order.

Fab. Let whoever wishes say it, worth cannot stay hidden; and every man of prowess who goes ahead prudently is the architect of his own fortunes.

Aret. Certainly, Fabrini, one can say with the utmost truth that there was never a man who put painting into higher esteem than Titian has done. Knowing his own worth, that is, he has always put a very high valuation on his own pictures—not caring to paint except for great men and people who could back up their appreciation with commensurate rewards. It would be a lengthy business to speak of the portraits he has done, which are of such great excellence that there is no more life in the life itself and are all of Kings, Emperors, Popes, Princes or other men of stature. Nor was there ever a cardinal or other grandee in Venice who did not visit Titian’s establishment to see his creations and have his own portrait painted. Discussion of the pictures which are in the College apartments would also take a long time. And the same applies to the many paintings he has done for the Emperor and the King of England: the picture of the Trinity, for instance; those of the Virgin grieving, of Tityos, Tantalus and Sisyphus, and of Andromeda; the one of

Adonis reproduced in an engraving which will be published shortly; and other treatments of historical and mythical subjects. These works are equally divine in terms of design on the one hand and coloring and invention on the other. I am proceeding

194 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento FIFTY-SIX

titenuto e scarso nelle sue laudi, si per essermi amico, e compare: e si perche, in tutto é orbo chi non vede il Sole. Ne voglio tacere, che Titiano dipinse in Mantova al Duca Federico la effigie, de i dodici Cesari, trahendogli parte dalle medaglie, e parte da marmi antichi. E sono di tanta perfettione, che vanno infiniti in quella Citta, solamente per vedergli, stimando di vedere i veri Cesari, e non Pitture. Fab. So ben’ io, che di haver ritratto o altra Pittura di sua mano si possono vantar pochissimi plebei.

Aret. E adunque il nostro Titiano nella Pittura divino e senza pari: ne si dovrebbe sdegnare l’istesso Apelle, quando e’ vivesse, di honorarlo. Ma egli ancora oltre alla mirabile eccellenza della Pittura, ha molte altre parti degne di grandissima laude. Prima &@ modestis-

simo: ne tassa mai alcun Pittore, e ragiona volontieri honoratamente di ciascuno, che merita. Dipoi é bellissimo parlatore, d’ingegno e di giudicio perfettissimo in tutte le cose: di piacevole e dolce Natura, affabile, e pieno di gentilissimi costumi: e chi gli parla una volta, e forza, che se ne innamori per sempre.

Fab. Tutto questo é verissimo. e, perche io stimo, che non vi resti altro in questa materia da ragionare, conchiudiamo, che, quantunque hoggidi ci siano stati molti Pittori eccellenti; questi tre ottengono il Prencipato: cioé Michel’Agnolo, Rafaello, e Titiano.

Aret. Cosi é, ma con la distintione, ch’io v’ho detto di sopra. E di presente io temo, che la Pittura non torni a smarrirsi un’altra volta: percioche de’ giovani non si vede risorgere alcuno, che dia speranza di dover pervenire a qualche honesta eccellenza: e quei, che potrebbono divenir rari, vinti dalla avaritia, poco o nulla si affaticano nelle opere loro. Non cosi fa Battista Franco Vinitiano: anzi studia sempre con ogni sollecitudine dipingendo e disegnando, di honorar Vinegia, e di acquistare a se stesso perpetua fama: onde é lodatissimo e chiaro Maestro, si in dipingere, come in disegnare. Ma voi ricordatevi, lasciando da canto l’affettione, d’esser per l’innanzi piu honesto guidice. IL FINE

The Dialogue on Painting of M. Lodovico Dolce 195 FIFTY-SIX

with restraint and brevity, however, in my sounding of Titian’s praises, first because he is a friend and colleague of mine, and then again because the man who does not see the sun is completely blind. Not that I want to pass over how Titian painted in Mantua, for Duke Federico, the features of the twelve Caesars, deriving them partly from the coinage and partly from antique marbles. And they are of such outstanding perfection that countless people visit that city purely in order to see them, in the belief that they are setting eyes on the real Caesars, instead of on paintings. Fab. I am well aware myself that very few commoners can boast of possessing a portrait or painting of another kind from his hand.

Aret. Our own Titian, therefore, is divine and without equal in the realm of painting; nor should Apelles himself refuse to do him honor, supposing he were alive. But above and beyond his amazing excellence as a painter, Titian also has many other qualities which deserve the highest praise. In the first place he is extremely modest; he never assesses any painter critically, and willingly discusses in respectful terms anyone who has merit. And then again he is a very fine conversationalist, with powers of intellect and judgment which are quite perfect in all contingencies, and a pleasant and gentle nature. He is affable and copiously endowed with an extreme courtesy of behavior. And the man who talks to him once is bound to fall in love with him for ever and always. Fab. All this is very true; and since I believe there is no other aspect of this subject remaining for you to discuss, let this be our conclusion: Although there have been many excellent painters in our time, the following three obtain pride of place—namely, Michelangelo, Raphael and Titian. Aret. Quite so, but with the qualification that I made to you earlier. And as of now J am afraid that painting may be losing its way once more. For one does not see amongst the young anyone newly coming up who offers hope of duly achieving some decent level of excellence; and those who could have become exceptional have succumbed to avarice and expend little or no effort on their works. This is not the case with Battista Franco from Venice. He, on the contrary, painting and drawing with all diligence, sets his sights unceasingly at doing honor to Venice and winning eternal fame for himself. He is, therefore, a much commended master and an eminent one—both in his painting and in his draftsmanship.

But you, for your part, should remember to leave aside affection and so be a more equitable judge from now on.

a

FIFTY-SEVEN

Al Magnifico e Valoroso S. Hieronimo Loredano

Ho sempre portato, Mag. S. Hieronimo, e porto del continuo nel mio animo un disiderio vivissimo di dimostrare in qualche parte l’antica mia affettione verso la Nobiliss. Casa Loredana: e questo non meno per cagioni publiche, che per mie proprie e particolari. Publiche, essendo questa una delle piu illustre famiglie di Vinegia, non solo per chiarezza di sangue, ma per il gran valore, e per le infinite virtu, che in lei sempre fioririno: come ne fanno fede molti ottimi Senatori et egregi Capitani, che nella guerra e nella pace apportarono quasi di ogni tempo grandissimo utile a questa felicissima Republica con perpetua lode e gloria di se medesimi: e, come ce ne da chiarissimo esempio il Sereness. Leonardo Loredano, Prencipe d’infiniti meriti; si come quello, che intento solamente al bene universale, ne’ tempi piu pericolosi e piu ardenti di guerra giovo alla sua carissima Rep. non meno col consiglio, che con la eloquenza, e con la liberalita. Di cui si legge honoratissima memoria nelle Historie del Cardinal Bembo; e ne sono ripieni gli annali in guisa, che tutti ne possono havere abondevole materia da ragionare. Per tacere hora il Reverendiss. Abbate Mons. Francesco, vostro Zio, et il Clariss. vostro padre (di cui io non sono bastante di accennare una minima parte delle gran bonta e delle quasi infinite virth) e di molti altri, che al presente sono chiari e ne gli honori e nelle gloriose doti dell’animo. Tra quali V.M. é in modo lucida e risplendente di molti rare e virtuosiss. qualita, che non é cosi honorato grado, di che ella non ne venga giudicata degna, e no’'l sia per ottenere. Ne meno tacero il novello Abbate Mons. Antonio digniss. suo fratello; ilguale in cosi teneri anni é ornato di bellissime lettere, e di tutti que’ nobili costumi, che in figliuolo di tanto padre e di cosi illustri progenitori, si possono disiderare. Per mie cagioni particolari: percioche oltre a molti benefici ricevuti dall’Avolo mio, e dalla mia casa da quel valorosissimo, cortesissimo, e non mai a bastanza lodato Prencipe, il Padre mio (che mi lascid morendo in eta di due anni) ne hebbe la Castaldia: honoratiss. ufficio a

DEDICATORY LETTER OF THE DIALOGUE FIFTY-SEVEN

To the august and valorous S. Hieronimo Loredano:

My lord, I have always carried within my spirit, and go on carrying there, a very keen desire to make plain in some respect my long-standing affection towards the most noble house of the Loredani—and this as much for public reasons, as for personal and special reasons of my own. As to public reasons: This family of yours is one of the most illustrious in Venice, not only because of its distinguished lineage, but also because of the great worth and the in-

numerable virtues which always flourished within it. Many excellent senators and distinguished military leaders testify to this, who in war and in peace, in almost every period, brought to this most fortunate Republic very considerable benefit, along with the award to themselves of praise and glory for ever. And a very distinguished example is provided here by his Serene Highness Leonardo Loredano, a Prince with an infinite number of worthy qualities—that of a man who, with only the universal good in view, in the most dangerous and fiercest periods of war helped the Republic that he held so very dear no less with advice than with eloquence and liberality. He is the subject of a greatly respected memoir in Cardinal Bembo’s historical writings, and comes up over and over in the annals, in such a way that everyone can obtain there an ample basis for discussion. I say nothing now of the Right Reverend Abbot Francesco, your uncle, and your most distinguished father (inadequacy keeps me from delineating one tiny fraction of the great goodness and almost innumerable virtues which are his). I also leave out many others, who are eminent at the present time both in distinctions and in glorious spiritual endowments. These last include your Highness, shining and resplendent with many rare and highly virtuous qualities, to the point where there is no rank so esteemed that you would be pronounced unworthy of it and stand no chance of securing it. I shall not even mention your most worthy brother Antonio, the new Abbot, who, tender as his age may be, is decked out with extremely fine literary gifts and all the noble traits of behavior that one can desire in the son of so outstanding a father and of such illustrious forebears. As to my own special reasons: The fact is that, above and beyond a wealth of benefits received from that most valorous, most courteous and never sufficiently praised Prince by my grandfather and my household, my father (whom death took away from me when

198 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento FIFTY-EIGHT

Cittadini. Havendo io adunque cosi fatti oblighi verso la Jllustrissima Casa vostra, non potendo con altro adempire il mio disiderio di dimostrar la divotione, che le ho sempre portato e porto, vengo inanzi di V.M. con questo picciol dono; che e quasi la fangosa acqua, che nelle palme delle roze mani appresento l’humil Contadino al gran Serse. Ma,

perche la Pittura, di cui in questo libricciulo sotto un paragone di Rafaello e di Michel’Agnolo si ragiona assai acconciamente, é arte nobile; e V.M. é nobilissima et humanissima, spero, che ella riguardando alla qualita del soggetto, e molto piu alla grandezza e sincerita del mio cuore, non si sdegnera di riceverlo volentieri, accettandomi nel numero di coloro, che la servono e riveriscono. Di Venetia, A XII di Agosto MDLVII. Di V.M. Servitore Lodovico Dolce.

Dedicatory Letter of the Dialogue 199 FIFTY-EIGHT

I was two years old) obtained the Castaldia from him—a post for citizens which is very highly esteemed.

These, then, are the sources of my indebtedness to your most illustrious family. And since I cannot otherwise ratify my desire to make plain the sense of devotion which has always been mine and still is, I present myself to your Highness with this tiny gift. It is somewhat like the muddy water which the lowly peasant presented to the great Xerxes in the palms of his rough hands. But since painting—the subject which is most appropriately discussed in this little book, in the shape of a comparison between Raphael and Michelangelo—is a noble art, and your Highness most noble and most humane, I hope that, taking into account the subject’s quality and to a far greater extent my fullness and sincerity of heart, you will not disdain to give it a ready reception, acceding me a place in the company of those who serve and revere you. Your Highness’s servant Lodovico Dolce

Venice, 12th August 1557

a

FIFTY-NINE

[Lodovico Dolce] a M. Gasparo Ballini

Io soglio sempre, quando aviene, che fra noi per cagion di diporto, o di certo piacevole trattenimento, ragioniamo dell’eccellenza de’ Dipintori del tempo nostro, dirvi; che a me piu assai sogliono piacere le cose di Rafaello da Urbino, che quelle di Michele Agnolo non fanno: & questo per molte ragioni, dellequali ve n’andro scrivendo alcune. Io non ardirei mai di dire fra huomini d’intelletto, che in quanto si appartiene a certa fierezza e terribilita di disegno, Michele Agnolo non tenga senza dubbio la prima palma di quanti Dipintori mai furone per molte eta. La onde non senza cagione fu cantato dal lodatissimo Ariosto. Michel piu, che mortale, Angel Divino.

Ma parimente aggiungo, che si come nelle faculta delle lettere, & in tutte le attioni delVhuomo, si dee serbar certa temperata misura, e certa considerata convenevolezza, senza laquale niuna cosa puo haver gratia, ne istar bene; cosi io giudicio, che cio non punto meno si ricerchi nella Pittura. Percioche havendo il Dipintore a rappresentar l’huomo, ha conseguentemente a rassomigliar diverse conditioni, e diverse operationi d’huomini; lequali non tengono punto di somiglianza fra loro. Di qui, quantunque egli sia piu difficile assai lo havere a dipingere huomini terribili e di statura di Gigante, che non é il farne di mansueti e comuni: non ne segue pero, che’l Dipintore, il cui oggetto dee essere d’imitar la natura, si dia sempre a finger quello, che la natura o non mai, o di rado suol producere. Che se bene non é cosa favolosa, che stati siano i Giganti; de’ quali oltre a quello, che se ne legge nelle historie Greche e Latine, le sacre lettere ne fanno testimonianza: non di meno essi non furono piu, che a un tempo, 0 vero in poche eta, in tanto che’ beato Agostino scrive, che lo haversi trovato a Roma una femina di forma di Gigantessa poco innanzi alla venuta de’ Gotti in Italia, fu cagione, che per vederla vi concorressero huomini di diverse parti, come a un prodigio, o vero miracolo di natura. E Dante abhorrendo cosi fatte stature, dice mirabilmente.

THE LETTER OF DOLCE TO GASPARO BALLINI FIETY-NINE

Lodovico Dolce to M. Gasparo Ballini:

On those occasions when, for the sake of amusement or some agreeable way of passing the time, we discuss amongst ourselves the excellence of the painters of our time, it is always my practice to tell you that the work of Raphael of Urbino habitually pleases me a good deal more than that of Michelangelo; and this for many reasons, one of which I shall be writing down for you as I proceed. With men of intelligence around me, I would never have the audacity to deny that, as far as a certain forcefulness and overpowering strength of design is concerned, Michelangelo unquestionably holds first place,

outstripping just as many painters as there have been, over the span of many ages. Hence it was not without reason that the greatly celebrated Ariosto penned that verse of his:

Michael called Angel, godlike superman!

But I would also add that, just as in the profession of letters and in all the activities of mankind one needs to maintain a certain restrained moderation and a certain propriety of a considered kind, in the absence of which no object can possess grace or make a good impression, so it is my opinion that one needs the above not a particle less in the case of painting. For inasmuch as the artist has to represent man, he thereby has to match various levels of existence and various human activities, which possess not the slightest resemblance to one another. By this token, even though the task of depicting fearsome and giant-sized men may be a good deal more arduous than their rendition as mild and normal-sized, it still does not follow that the painter, whose objective ought to be the imitation of nature, should unceasingly dedicate himself to conjuring up what nature is in the habit of producing either never at all, or rarely. That giants have existed is not, to be sure, a matter of legend; over and above what one finds on the subject in the pages of the Greek and Latin historians, the Scriptures provide evidence here. All the same, however, their existence was confined to a single period, or else to a few epochs, so that St. Augustine writes that the fact that a woman with the build of a giantess had materialized in Rome shortly before the Goths entered Italy brought it about that men gathered to see her from here and from there, as if she were a prodigy, or indeed one of nature’s wonders. And Dante, moved to disgust by such aberrations of size, has the admirable lines:

202 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento SIXTY

Natura certo, quando lasci6 l’arte Di si fatti Animali, assai fe bene, Per torre tali esecutori a Marte.

Non dee adunque il Dipintore, che é imitatore & emulo della natura, riputar piu bella nell’huomo quella forma, che é piu sprezzata da essa natura. Anzi, si come tra le bellissime opere di lei la piu cara, e la piu aggradevole all’occhio, é la varieta: cosi dee procacciare il Dipintore d’esser vario nelle cose sue: e non vi essendo, non puo dilettar compiutamente. Ora vedete, se questa parte cotanto necessaria si ritrova nell’opere di Michele Agnolo. Che tutte le figure, ch’egli fa, sono grandi, terribili, e spaventose. Direte voi, che la varieta é ne gliatti; che sono tutti diversi l’uno dall’altro. Rispondo, che in questa istessa varieta v’e una medesima somiglianza di scorti, di fierezze, e di moscoli. Perche alhora pare a Michele Agnolo trionfar con infinito honore di Rafaello, e di tutti glialtri Dipintori, quando ei mostra di essere eccellente nelle maggiori difficulta dell’arte: & e vero, che gueste difficulta si contengono maggiormente nel formar gl’ignudi, e nel fare iscortar le figure. Ma parmi, che a questo egli si possa rispondere, che nella guisa, che l’huomo naturalmente operando, non sempre ripresenta attitudine, onde al Dipintore per rassembrarla faccia mestiero di usare alcuno iscorto: cosi non bisogna, che egli di continuo questi scorti vada studiosamente ricercando nel dipingere: & altretanto gl’ignudi; ma rare volte. Percioche le cose difficili (& anco strane da vedere) come queste sono; quanto si dipingono piu di rado, tanto apportano la maraviglia & il diletto maggiore. Et alhora a mio giudicio gli scorti riescono piu riguardevoli, quando il Dipintore vinto dalla strettezza del luogo, o dalla molta copia delle figure, che servono alla inventione, sa in poca piazza accommodar di molte cose: o vero, quando indotto pure semplicemente da gliatti, gli conviene fare iscortare, o braccio, o gamba, o mano, 0 piede, o testa, o altro membro; facendo pero cio con giudicio e discretione. Overo alle volte per dimostrar di sapere. Senza, che non sara alcuno, che con ragione mi disponga a credere, che non si possa nel dipinger dimostrare ogni maggiore artificio, senza far sempre veder discoperte quelle parti, che la natura ci insegna a tener nascoste. E pure in questo Michele Agnolo é troppo, e fuor di misura li-

The Letter of Dolce to Gasparo Ballini 203 SIXTY

When she gave up the forging of such brutes Certainly Nature did very well; for Mars Was robbed of this fine source for his recruits.

Thus the painter, who is nature’s imitator and rival, should not overestimate the beauty of a form in man, when nature’s own stress is on disdain for that form. Rather, inasmuch as, amongst nature’s most beautiful products, the one best loved and most pleasing to the eye is variety, the artist should set his sights accordingly at the achievement of variety in his own creations; and if he does not achieve it, he cannot give pleasure in the fullest sense. Now consider whether this element, which is so indispensable, is to be found in the works of Michelangelo. The fact is that all of the figures he produces are large, awesome and terrifying. You will say that variety is present in the actions, all of which differ from one another. My answer is that within this very variety there is an unchanging pattern of foreshortenings, of forceful elements and musculature. There is, then, the idea on Michelangelo’s part that he triumphs with immeasurable distinction over Raphael and all the other painters, when he shows that he is excellent at handling the hardest artistic problems. And it is true that these problems loom the larger in the construction of nudes and the foreshortening of figures. But it seems to me that One can answer this by saying that, just as man, when acting naturally, does not always present one with the kind of pose which requires the use of some foreshortening if the painter is to match it, so there is no call in painting for an incessantly diligent quest

for foreshortenings; and the same applies equally to nudes. Better their infrequent appearance; for elements which are hard to paint (and also, as in this case, unfamiliar to the eye), the more infrequently they are portrayed, engender wonder and greater pleasure correspondingly. And foreshortenings turn out more noteworthy, in my opinion, on those occasions when the painter, discomfited by limitations of space or by the great wealth of figures needed to take care of his invention, is able to fit a large number of elements into a small area: or else when, purely and simply by virtue of the actions, it is appropriate for him to foreshorten an arm or leg or hand or foot or a head or some other limb—provided he does this with judgment and discretion, or for the occasional purpose of demonstrating his ability here. Not that anyone will reason me into believing that one cannot exhibit all the major skills in painting without constantly leaving uncovered those parts of the body which nature teaches us to keep concealed. And

a

204 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento SIXTY-ONE

centioso, per non dir dishonesto. Della invention non ne dico nulla: perche e comun giudicio di chi intende, che in questa cotal parte egli non molto sia riuscito. Ma allo incontro, se noi ci rivolgiamo a considerar diligentemente le cose di Rafaello, vedremo; che quantunque per la maggior parte le sue figure siano gratiose e delicate; non é pero, che quando il soggetto lo ricercava, egli non ve n’habbia fatte di terribili e fiere: cosi anco non e rimaso di formare ignudi e scorti, secondo il luogo e le occasioni, sempre tuttavia havendo risguardo alla honesta non solamente nelle cose sacre, ma nelle profane ancora. E medesimamente ha ricercato la varieta in guisa, che vecchi, giovani, fanciulli, donne attempate e giovani, in diverse attitudini, habiti, stature, e forme ci ha lasciato dipinte in tanta copia, ch’egli pare, che la natura nelle cose da vero non usi maggior diversita. Appresso secondo la differenza del sesso, della eta, e della professione, si vede differenza di moscoli, di membra, di aria, e di movimenti. Oltre, che egli secondo la diversita delle nationi, de’ tempi, e de’ costumi, ha sempre finto diversita di habiti e di maniere parimente. ne’ quali habiti @ miracoloso: perche non vi si trovano confusioni & intrigamenti di pieghe, ne tanta sodezza, che dimostri poverta d’ingegno. e vedesi, che’l suo gentil giudicio ha sempre avertito alla conditione e natura de’ panni: percioche altre pieghe ricerca il raso, & altre l’ormigino. E se bene bisogna, che’l panno a suoi luoghi accenni il nudo, che v’e di sotto, é da fuggir di cadere a quell’estremo vitioso, che i panni assembrino attaccati alle carni. Aggiungo, che intorno alle proportioni de’ corpi (in che consiste tutto il sommo dell’arte) Rafaello ha sempre usato una cotale temperatezza, che niuna cosa vi si disidera: percioche egli non pecca in troppa sveltezza; ne d’altra parte sono le sue figure nane; ne grosse, ne troppo carnose: cosi non hanno del secco, ne del meschino; e, che é principal lode del Dipintore, in tutte si vede diligenza & amore, come di padre. Tutto é bene inteso, tutto ben considerato, e si gira per li suoi termini. Non dipingeva a caso, o per pratica, ma sempre con molto studio; & haveva due fini: l’uno d’imitar la bella maniera delle statue antiche; e l’altro di contender con la natura, in modo, che veggendo le cose dal vivo, dava loro piu bella forma, ricercando nelle sue opere una perfettione intera, che non

The Letter of Dolce to Gasparo Ballini 205 SIXTY-ONE

yet it is in this regard that Michelangelo is excessively and immoderately licentious, not to say indecent. I say not a word on the subject of his invention, because it is general for

the connoisseur to consider that he has achieved no great success in this quarter. Whereas if, on the other hand, we turn to assiduously considering Raphael’s creations, we shall see that, even though his figures are mostly gracious and delicate, this does not mean that, when the subject called for them, he did not produce awesome and forceful ones. So too he did not hesitate to construct nudes and foreshortenings, when the place and the circumstances warranted this. Yet at the same time he always took modesty into consideration, not only in his religious works but also in his secular ones. And similarly he was intent on variety, so that he left behind him old men, youths and boys, elderly women and young ones, depicted in a variety of poses and costumes, sizes and shapes, in such abundance that one has the impression that nature employs no wider a variety in the world of reality. Again, in line with the differences of sex, age and occupation, one observes a differentiation of musculature, limbs, expressions and movements. Furthermore, he has always conjured up a variety of costumes, in line with the differences of nationality, period and custom; and the same with patterns of behavior. Indeed, he is miraculous where these costumes are concerned; for confusions and entanglements of the folds are not to be found, nor a solidity so pronounced that it indicates poverty of intelligence. And one sees that his refined discernment was always alert to the quality and character of the clothing. Satin calls for one kind of fold, that is, and watered silk another; and even though the garment needs to indicate in the right places the naked body which lies beneath it, one should avoid descending to that extreme of iniquity where the clothes look as if they were stuck to the flesh. I would add that, where the proportion of the bodies is concerned (which forms the sum total of art), Raphael always practiced such a moderation that there is not one thing to be desired here. For he does not fall into the error of excessive slimness; nor, on the other hand, are his figures dwarfish or corpulent or overfleshy. Similarly, there is nothing dry or paltry about them; and one perceives in them all that is preeminently praiseworthy in the painter—fatherlike care and love. Everything is well understood, every element is well thought out and travels through the spaces which belong to it. Raphael did not paint at random, or for the sake of practice, but always with much application; and he had two aims. One was to emulate the beauty of style found in antique statues, and the other to so vie with nature that, even while he drew his vision of things from the life, he endowed these things with greater beauty of

206 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento SIXTY-TWO

si truova nel vivo: percioche la natura non porge a un corpo solo tutte le sue bellezza; e mendicarle in molti é difficile; ridurle poi insieme in una figura, che non discordino, é quasi del tutto impossibile. Ilche é da credere, che facesse anticamente Fidia, Apelle e glialtri famosi: e ne habbiamo in piu luoghi il testimonio di Cicerone. E, se Zeusi nel formar della sua Helena si hebbe a servire delle cinque fanciulle; chi dubita, ch’egli non v’aggiungesse molte parti d’eccellenza, che in quelle non si trovavano? Ma tornando a Rafaello, oltra alle cose da me raccontate, rare sono le opere sue; dove non si vegga alcun bello

edificio, o qualche parte di prospettiva, che diletta sommamente. E, quanto alla Inventione, € sempre tale, che é da credere, che la verita dell’historia non appresentasse le cose meglio, ne altrimenti. Quanto al colorito, odo dire, che Rafaello si ha lasciato di gran lunga a dietro tutti quelli, che hanno mai dipinto in Roma, e per I’Italia. Di che ne rendono piena certezza i molti ritratti da lui fatti, e le cose tutte dipinte di sua mano. E se alcuno é, che dica in altra guisa; 0 costui é mosso da invidia; 0 é di coloro, che apprezzano piu certa superstitiosa vaghezza di colori, che l’arte. Come avvene gia a Papa Sisto: ilquale havendo fatto dipingere ad alcuni eccellenti Maestri certe historie; tra i quali v’era uno, che poco sapeva, essendo le historie fornite, guidicd egli piu bello il lavoro del Dipintor goffo, per cagione, che esso conoscendo il poco giudicio del Papa, haveva astutamente la

sua opra arricchita di finissimi azurri; & per tutto sparso di molto oro; & usativi colori, che empievano la vista. Non dico perd, che i bei colori non adornino: ma se aviene, che sotto il colorito, & insieme col colorito, non si contenga la bellezza e perfettion del disegno, la fatica € vana; & é a punto, come le belle parole senza il sugo & il nervo delle sentenze. Di qui errano a mio giudicio coloro, che volendo lodare il mirabile Titiano, dicono, ch’ei tinge bene. Che se egli altra lode, che questa non meritasse; molte Donne lo vincerebbono: lequali senza dubbio col bianco e col vermiglio tingono con tanta bella maniera le faccie loro, che, quanto all’apparenza de’ colori, gli huomini ne restano ingannati. Ma, se elle hanno il naso lungo, la bocca grande, e gliocchi, dove stanno i seggi delle gratie, e della bellezza, guerci, o mal composti; le tinte di que’ colori non impediscono,

The Letter of Dolce to Gasparo Ballini 207 SIXTY-TWO

form, seeking out an integral perfection in his works, which is not found in the living world. Nature does not bestow all of her beauties on one single body, that is, and to get many bodies to yield them up is taxing; while to assemble them subsequently in one figure so that they do not clash is almost completely impossible. There is reason to believe that this is what Phidias, Apelles and other celebrities brought off in ancient times; we also have the testimony of Cicero on this subject in several places. And if Zeuxis resorted

to the use of five maidens for the forming of his Helen, who can doubt that he added many elements of excellence which were not to be found in them? But to go back to Raphael, above and beyond the facts which I have recounted, rarely are there works of his in which one does not see some fine building or some piece of perspective which gives

pleasure in the highest degree. And where invention is concerned he is always so fine that one is led to believe that the very actuality at back of his subject did not present the facts better or otherwise. As for coloring, I venture to say that Raphael has left all those who have ever practiced painting in Rome and throughout Italy a long way behind. A full certification of this is provided by the many portraits he has done and the works entirely painted by his hand. And if there is anyone who says otherwise, either this man is under the sway of envy, or he is one of those who value a certain irrational beauty of coloring more than art. This is what once came about with Pope Sixtus. He had arranged for certain excellent masters to do some history paintings, and there was one member of this group whose ability was small. When the history paintings were completed, he considered the clumsy painter’s workmanship more beautiful, owing to the fact that the latter, recognizing the Pope’s weakness of judgment, had astutely enriched his handiwork with the most subtle blues, and scattered a quantity of gold throughout and employed colors there which gorged the eye. I am not in fact saying that beautiful colors are not ornamental. But if it comes about that the beauty and perfection of draftsmanship is not embodied under the coloring and along with the coloring, the effort is pointless—just like beautiful words without the substance and sinew of sentence structure. Hence I consider those people misguided who, when they want to praise the admirable Titian, say that he tints well. For if he deserved no other commendation than this, then many ladies could outdo him who unquestionably tint their faces with white and vermilion in such fine style that people remain deceived as far as the appearance of the colors is concerned. But if they have a nose that is long, a mouth that is large, and squinting or badly arranged eyes—where the graces and beauty have their seats—the

a 208 Dolce’s ‘“Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

SIXTY-THREE

che la bruttezza, o sconciatura non apparisca. La lode adungue del dipingere é posta principalmente nel dispor delle forme, ricercando in essa il bello, & il perfetto della natura. In che l’eccellentissimo Titiano, come in ogn’altra parte, é non pure, nella maniera che il mondo lo tiene, divino, ma divinissimo, e senza pari; si come quello, che con la

perfettion del disegno accompagna la vivacita del colorito in guisa, che le sue cose assembrano non dipinte, ma vere. Un’altra parte vuol havere il Dipintore non men necessaria di tutte l’altre. Questa é, che le dipinture, ch’egli fa, movano gli affetti e le passioni dell’animo, in modo, che i riguardanti, o si allegrino, o si turbino secondo la qualita de’ soggetti: come fanno i buoni Poeti, e gli Oratori. Laqual parte, che fosse ne’ Dipintori antichi, ci puo servire lo esempio della statua del Laocoonte, ch’é a Roma in Belvedere. Conviensi medesimamente, che le carni habbiano del morbido, e del tenero, piu e meno, secondo, che la qualita della figura lo ricerca. Che piu morbidezza alle carni d’una Donna, che d’un huomo si appartiene: d’un giovane, che d’un vecchio: d’un gentilhuomo, che d’un conta-

dino: d’un’huomo avezzo a viversi in pace e delicatamente, che d’un soldato uso alle fatiche & all’arme, e somiglianti. E le tinte debbono parimente variarsi, come le varia la natura. Percioche una estrema bianchezza sempre non piace: anzi un certo temperamento tra il bianco & il bruno, contiene ogni grado di vaghezza: come si vede nella Santa Cate-

rina del nostro gran Titiano, laquale é in San Nicolo de’ frati minori. Ma in contrario

quella tanta diversita di colori, che affettano per la maggior parte hoggidi i Dipintori nelle opere loro, oltre che ella si conosce esser da essi ricercata per dar rilevo alle figure, e per dilettare a gliocchi de gl’ignoranti, é anco fuori del verisimile. Percioche rade volte si veggono, e forse non mai, ridotti insieme huomini di tante divise. Onde altri siano coperti di panni vermigli, altri di gialli, altri di color pavonazzo, e chi di azurro, e chi di verde rame. Queste belle convenevolezze adunque, queste minute considerationi, e queste nobili perfettioni dell’arte, si trovano nelle cose di Rafaello. Il perche non e maraviglia, ch’egli vivendo fosse amato & honorato da tutti i maggiori personaggi, e da tutti i piu belli in-

telletti, che alhora fiorivano: e morendo habbia di se lasciato fama & ammiratione in tutto’l mondo, in guisa, ch’ogni sua carta e disegno é prezzato, come si prezzano le gemme

e ’oro. Queste sono in parte quelle ragioni, che al mio giudicio (qual’egli si sia) fanno, che piu dilettino le cose di Rafaello, che di Michele Agnolo. Non pero, che io non istimi

The Letter of Dolce to Gasparo Ballini 209 SIXTY-THREE

tints of these colors do not prevent their ugliness or deformity from being plain. Praise for painting, therefore, has its main basis in the layout of the forms, the objective here being the beauty and perfection of nature. In this, as in every other respect, Titian in his supreme excellence is not just divine, as the world takes him to be, but absolutely godlike and without equal—like a man who backs up the liveliness of his coloring with the consummation of draftsmanship in such a way that his creations look as if they were not painted, but real. One further element, no less necessary than all of the others, should be at the painter’s command. It is this: The paintings that he produces should stir the actions and passions of the mind, as good poets and public speakers do, in such a way that the spectators experience either joy or agitation, according to the character of the subject matter. The example of the Laocoon statue, which is in the Belvedere in Rome, may serve here to show that this element was present in the painters of antiquity. It is similarly fitting that the flesh areas should embody softness and tenderness, to a greater or lesser degree, according as the character of the figure requires this. Softness is more

appropriate, that is, in a woman’s flesh than a man’s, in a young man’s than an old man’s, and a nobleman’s than a peasant’s; in the flesh of a man accustomed to living in peace and in a cultivated style, as against the flesh of a soldier inured to exertion and carrying arms; and so on. The tones too should similarly be varied, just as nature has her variety here. For an extreme intensity of white is always displeasing, whereas a certain just proportion intermediate between white and brown embodies every range of loveliness, as one sees in the St. Catherine of our great Titian, which is in San Niccolo de’ Frati Minori. But in contrast, that great diversity of colors which the painters of today mostly affect in their works, besides making it clear that their object in pursuing this has been to give their figures projection and please the eyes of the ignorant, is also beyond probability. These beauties of propriety, then, these attentions to detail, these noble feats in the perfection of art are found in the works of Raphael. Consequently it is not surprising that, during his lifetime, he should have been loved and honored by all the most eminent grandees and all the finest intellects who were flourishing then, and that at his death he should have left behind fame and admiration for him the whole world over, so that every study-sheet and drawing of his is valued as gems and gold are valued. These are some of the reasons which in my opinion (such as it may be) make Raphael’s works a source of greater pleasure than those of Michelangelo. Which is not to say that I do not consider

210 Dolce’s ‘“Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento SIXTY-FOUR

Michele Agnolo, come di sopra io dissi, Divino: percioch’oltre, ch’egli e stato il primo, che in questa eta ha dato luce e perfettione alla Pittura, tiensi anco, che egli habbia ridotta la scoltura alla eccellenza de gliantichi. Ma voi mi terrete troppo ardito, che io voglia

parlar di tai cose cosi alla libera. Ma chi é fondato sopra cosi fatte ragioni, non puo errare: dove in contrario erra una infinita di Dipintori, che non le sanno: e per macchiare searbatamente una tela, o un legno d’un ritratto, o pur di diverse figure fatte piu per una lunga consuetudine, che per discorrimento, 0 per arte, vogliono non solamente esser tenuti eccellentissimi maestri; ma passare innanzi a Rafaello, a Michele Agnolo, & a Titiano: e non essendo apprezzati, si lamentano non della ignoranza loro, ma della fortuna. Come anco aviene a molti da noi altri scrittori. State sano. E dite all’ingenioso Camilletto, fan-

ciullo di grande speranza, che s’affatichi assai, e stimi di saper poco: che per questo camino si perviene alla disiderata perfettione di qualunque cosa.

The Letter of Dolce to Gasparo Ballini 211 SIXTY-FOUR

Michelangelo to be, as I stated earlier, divine—the point being that, apart from having been the first man to give painting illumination and perfection in this age, he is also held to have brought sculpture back to the ancients’ level of excellence. But you will think me too bold in wishing to talk of such things so freely. Still, the man whose position is based on reasons of this kind cannot go wrong. In contrast, an infinite number of painters who are not aware of these points do go wrong here. And in return for clumsily bespattering a canvas, or a panel containing a portrait, or else various figures—figures which have been executed more by dint of long habit than by dint of reasoning or art—they want not only to be regarded as masters of the highest excellence, but to move out in front of Michelangelo, Raphael and Titian; and when they go unappreciated, they complain not of their own ignorance, but of fortune. The same thing also happens to many of us writers. Keep well, and tell clever little Camillo, that boy of great promise, that he should work

himself hard and consider that he knows little; for it is by this route that one arrives at the desired perfection of anything.

wee

SIXTY-FIVE

[Lodovico Dolce] al Mag. M. Alessandro Contarini

Se io sapessi hora cosi ben ritrarre a V.S. con le mie parole l’/Adone di Titiano; come ella pochi di sono, dipinse a me con le sue il quadro di Rafaello da Urbino: io mi do a

credere indubitatamente, che voi direste; che non fu mai da Dipintore antico ne da moderno imaginata, ne dipinta cosa di maggior perfettione. Pure quel tanto, che io ne sapro ombreggiare con questa penna, bastera, se io non m’inganno, a crear nel vostro bell’animo una maraviglia tale, quale alquanto a dietro produsse la mia lingua in quello del Magnifico M. Pietro Gradenico, in guisa, che sognandosi egli la notte una eccellenza incomparabile, il giorno, che segui, volendone certificar gliocchi suoi, andato a vederlo, trovo, che l’effetto di gran lunga avanzava la sua imaginatione, & il mio abbozzamento. Fu questa poesia di Adone poco tempo adietro fatta e mandata da divin Titiano al Re d’Inghilterra. E per incominciar dalla forma, egli I’ha finto di statura convenevole a garzone di sedici o diciotto anni, ben proportionato, gratioso, et in ogni sua parte leggiadro, con una tinta di carne amabile, che lo dimostra delicatissimo e di sangue Reale. E vedesi, che nell’aria del viso questo unico Maestro ha ricercato di esprimere certa gratiosa bellezza, che participando della femina, non si discostasse pero dal virile: vuo dire, che in Donna terrebbe non so che di huomo, & in huomo di vaga Donna: mistura difficile, aggradevole, e sommamente (se creder dobbiamo a Plinio) prezzata da Apelle. Quanto all’attitudine, egli si vede muovere, & il movimento é facile, gagliardo, e con gentil maniera. Perche sembra, ch’ei sia in camino per dipartirsi da Venere, con disiderio ardentissimo di gire alla caccia. Nell’una mano tiene uno spiedo da cacciatore. All’altro braccio e maestrevolmente legato il laccio de’ Cani: iquali sono tre in tre diversi atti, di si bella forma, e cosi naturalmente dipinti, che par, che fiutino, latrino, e siano invogliatissimi di affrontar qualunque fiera. Il garzone é vestito d’un drappicino corto a mezza gamba, con le braccia ignude, e calzato di due bolzacchini verissimi, con alcuni legami, vaghi di perle,

che lustrano, e paiono orientali. Volge il viso a Venere con occhi allegri e ridenti; apprendo dolcemente due labbra rosate, o pure di vivo corallo: e par, che con vezzi lascivi & amorosi la conforti a non temere: percioche tra la serenita della guardatura, & il mover

THE LETTER OF DOLCE TO ALESSANDRO CONTARINI SIXTY-FIVE

Lodovico Dolce to the august M. Alessandro Contarini:

If I were able at this time to portray Titian’s Adonis to your Lordship with words of mine as well as you, a few days ago, described to me with yours the painting by Raphael of Urbino, I harbor the assured belief that you would say that no more perfect creation was ever conceived or painted, either by an ancient artist or by a modern one. Nonetheless, what I shall be able to adumbrate with this pen will, if I am not deceiving myself, suffice to create in your fine mind an amazement of the same order as my language produced some time ago in that of the august Messer Pietro Gradenigo, so that he dreamt during the night of an excellence beyond compare; and the next day, in the desire to give his eyes corroboration here, he went to see the work and found that its impress far surpassed his imagination and my rough outline. This poem on the subject of Adonis was carried out a short while back and sent by the

divine Titian to the King of England. And to begin with the form, he has conceived of Adonis as being of a height appropriate to a lad of sixteen or eighteen, well proportioned, handsome and graceful in every one of his parts, with a pleasing tint to his flesh in which extreme delicacy and the presence of royal blood are conveyed. And one sees that

in the facial expression this unique master has aimed to convey a certain handsome beauty which would have its share of femininity, yet not be remote from virility: I mean

that in a woman it would embody an indefinable quality of manhood, and in a man something of beautiful womanhood—an amalgam which is hard to achieve and agreeable and was (if we are to believe Pliny) supremely prized by Apelles. As for the pose, one

sees Adonis moving, and his movement is easy, vigorous, and gentle in its temper, for one has the impression that, with a very burning desire to go off hunting, he is stepping out in order to take his leave of Venus. In one hand he holds a huntsman’s spear; to the other arm the hound’s leash is attached, in a masterly way. There are three of these hounds in three different poses, so lovely in their form and so naturally depicted that it seems that they are sniffing for scent, baying and most eager to come up against some wild beast. The young man is dressed in a short little garment reaching halfway down his legs. His arms are bare, and he has on his feet two extremely realistic bootees; some of the laces are decked with pearls, which shine and seem oriental. He turns his face towards Venus with lively and smiling eyes, sweetly parting two lips of rose, or indeed live coral; and one has the impression that with wanton and amorous endearments he is com-

214 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento SIXTY-SIX

della bocca, dimostra manifestamente l’intrinseco del suo animo; e tutto poi serve in vece di parole. Ne si puod discerner qual parte in lui sia piu bella, perche ciascuna separata-

mente, e tutte insieme, contengono la perfettion dell’arte: & il colorito contende col disegno, & il disegno col colorito. Del qual colorito chi é manchevole, non si dee dimandar Dipintore. Che non basta il saper formar le figure in disegno eccellenti, se poi le tinte de’ colori, che deono imitar la carne, hanno del porfido, o del terregno, e sono prive di quella unione, tenerezza, e vivacita, che fa ne’ corpi la natura. Perd si legge nelle cose de’ Dipintori antichi, che alcuni ingannarono gli uccelli, & altri i cavalli. E voi sapete, che si come per bonta di disegno niuno é superiore a Titiano; cosi tiensi per cosa vera, che in questa parte del colorire niuno l’aguagliasse giamai. Ma vegniamo alla Venere, vedesi in questa

un giudicio soprahumano. Che havendo egli a dipingere una cosi fatta Dea, si rappresento nell’animo una bellezza non pure straordinaria, ma divina; e per dirlo in una parola, una bellezza conveniente a Venere, in guisa, ch’ella assembra quella, che meritd in Ida il pomo d’oro. Qui molte cose sono da dire, che hanno tutte del miracoloso e del celeste;

ma io non m’assicuro pur d’imaginarmele, non che di scriverle. La Venere é volta di schena, non per mancamento d’arte, come fece quel dipintore, ma per dimostrar doppia arte. Perche nel girar del viso verso Adone, sforzandosi con ambe le braccia di ritenerlo, e meza sedendo sopra un drappo sodo di pavonazzo, mostra da per tutto alcuni sentimenti dolci e vivi, e tali, che non si veggono, fuor che in lei: dove é ancora mirabile accortezza di questo spirito divino, che nell’ultime parti ci si conosce la macatura della carne causata dal sedere. Ma che? puossi con verita dire, che ogni colpo di penello sia de que’ colpi, che suol far di sua mano la natura. Lo aspetto é parimente, qual si dee creder, che fosse quello di Venere, s’ella fu mai: nel quale appariscono manifesti segni della paura,

che sentiva il suo cuore dell’infelice fine, che al giovane avenne. E se alla Venere, che usciva dal mare, dipinta da Apelle, di cui fanno tanto rumore i Poeti, e gli Scrittori antichi, haveva la meta della bellezza, che si vede in questa, ella non fu indegna di quelle laudi. Vi giuro, Signor mio, che non si truova huomo tanto acuto di vista e di giudicio;

The Letter of Dolce to Alessandro Contarini 215 SIXTY-SIX

forting Venus into not being afraid. For by way of the serenity of his way of looking and the movement of his mouth he patiently discloses the inner workings of his mind; and it all does subsequent service in lieu of words. Nor is it possible to distinguish which of his

parts is more beautiful. For each one separately and all of them together embody the perfection of art, and the coloring competes with the design, and the design with the coloring. The man who is defective in this matter of coloring should not be called a painter. For it is not enough to be able to make the figures excellent in their design, if thereafter the tints of the colors, which should imitate flesh, partake of porphyry or of earth and lack that cohesion and softness and animation which nature effects in human bodies. For this very reason one reads in the accounts of the painters of antiquity that some of them deceived birds and others horses. And you know that, just as no one is superior to Titian because of prowess in draftsmanship, so it is regarded as a true fact that in this field of coloring no one ever equalled him. But let us move on to the Venus. One sees in her case a superhuman discernment, in

that Titian, faced with the task of depicting such a goddess, envisioned in his mind a beauty which was not just extraordinary, but divine; and, to sum it up in a word, a beauty appropriate to Venus in the sense of a resemblance here to she who carried off the golden apple on Mount Ida. There are many features to talk about here, all of which partake of the miraculous and the celestial; but I am not even sure that I can envision them, let alone

write them down. The Venus has her back turned, not for want of art—as in a certain painter’s performance—but to display art in double measure. For in the turn of her face towards Adonis, as she exerts herself with both arms to hold him back and is half-seated on a firm cloth of peacock-blue, she everywhere evinces certain feelings which are sweet and vital and such that they are not seen except in her. With her, too, there is a marvellous piece of dexterity on the part of this divine spirit, in that one recognizes in the hindmost parts here the distension of the flesh caused by sitting. Yes indeed, one can truthfully say

that every stroke of the brush belongs with those strokes that nature is in the habit of making with its hand. Similarly her look corresponds to the way one must believe that Venus would have looked if she ever existed; there appear in it evident signs of the fear she was feeling in her heart, in view of the unhappy end to which the young man came. And if the Venus depicted by Apelles as emerging from the sea—the subject of so much talk amongst the poets and writers of antiquity—possessed half of the beauty one sees in this Venus, she was not unworthy of these eulogies. I swear to you, my Lord, that there is

216 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cingquecento SIXTY-SEVEN

che veggendola non la creda viva: niuno cosi affreddato da gli anni, o si duro di complessione, che non si senta riscaldare, intenerire, e commoversi nelle vene tutto il sangue. Ne é maraviglia, che se una statua di marmo pote in modo con gli stimoli della sua bel-

lezza penetrar nelle midolle d’un giovane, ch’ei vi lascid la macchia: hor, che dee far questa, che é di carne; ch’é la belta istessa; che par, che spiri? Trovasi ancora nel medesimo quadro una macchia d’un paese di qualita, che’l vero non é tanto vero: dove al sommo d’un picciol colle non molto lontano dalla vista v’é un pargoletto Cupido, che si dorme all’ombra; la quale gli batte diritto sopra il capo; & al d’intorno v’ha splendori e riflessi di Sole mirabilissimi, che allumano, & allegrano tutto il paese. Ma tutto questo, che io mi sono affatico di dirvi, é uno accennamento picciolo a rispetto della divinita (che altra parola non si conviene) di questa Pittura. Vi puo bastare, che ella é di mano di Titiano, e fatta per il Re d’Inghilterra. Voi Signor mio degnatevi talhora de i frutti leggiadrissimi del vostro nobilissimo ingegno: ilquale insieme co’ belli studi delle lettere accompagnate l’ornamento d’ogni virtu scelta, & lodevole.

The Letter of Dolce to Alessandro Contarini 217 SIXTY-SEVEN

no man so sharp of sight and discernment that he does not believe when he sees her that she is alive; no one so chilled by age or so hard in his makeup that he does not feel himself growing warm and tender, and the whole of his blood stirring in his veins. And no wonder; for if a marble statue could, with the shafts of its beauty, penetrate to the marrow of a young man so that he left his stain there, then what should this figure do which is made of flesh, which is beauty itself, which seems to breathe? The picture in question also includes a painterly piece of landscape, of such quality that the reality is not so real. Here on top of a little hill, at no great distance from one’s sight, there is a baby Cupid sleeping in the shade, which falls straight onto his head; and round about there are very wonderful bright gleams and reflections of sunshine, which light up and gladden the whole landscape. But all that I have worked hard to tell you here is a small intimation, compared to this painting’s divinity (for no other word will do). You can count it enough that it is from the hand of Titian and painted for the King of England. You, my Lord, should hold in esteem from now on the very charming fruits of your most noble intellect—you who combine with fine literary pursuits the ornament of every choice and praiseworthy virtue.

COMMENTARY ON THE TEXT OF THE DIALOGUE

PAGE ONE

Pietro Aretino

For the whole question of Dolce’s relations with Aretino and his choice of this man as the main interlocutor and figurehead of his Dialogue, see Intro., pp. 32ff.

To sum up the most important points that emerge, there were evidently four main factors underlying this choice. First, there were Aretino’s leadership of a Venetian literary and artistic circle of great eminence! and Dolce’s own experience of this circle; at the least, that is, he had once belonged for a time to its “outer ring.” Second, Aretino had been unceasingly active in Venice, over a period of nearly thirty years, as a promoter of Titian’s art and a spokesman for its quality; he had also been one of Titian’s leading Venetian patrons.” Third, he was the author of a body of published letters, in which he had made rich and regular comments on the current artistic scene.? Finally, he died late in 1556. At that time Dolce had already formulated the main themes of his Dialogue on paper; ten months later he would have the whole text finished and ready for publication. Giovan Francesco Fabrini

Fabrini (1516-1580) was a grammarian from Figline in Tuscany, who was called to Venice in 1547 to occupy the chair of eloquence and remained there teaching this subject for thirty years.® His publications included: Della interpretazione della lingua volgare e latina, 1544; an Italian version of Francesco Patrizi’s De institutione reipublicae, 1545; Teorica della lingua, 1548; and commentaries to Il Terenzio latino, 1548, and Le opere di Orazio, 1565.®

Dolce’s choice of Fabrini to serve as the second interlocutor of his Dialogue evidently had a threefold basis. First, Fabrini was a letterato of proven ability who held a distinguished teaching post in Venice. The arguments given to both him and Aretino in the course of the Dialogue include a number of incidental references to contemporary criti-

cism and the theory of literature in general (cf. Intro., pp. 12-14). Dolce himself was

Note: To help distinguish clearly the references to kunstlerische Bekenntniss,”” Neue Heidelberger pages of the text of the Dialogue, ‘‘page’’ is spelled Jahrbucher, 10, 1900, 38ff.; S. Ortolani, ‘’Le origini

out in these references only. della critica d’arte a Venezia,’ L’ Arte, 26, 1923,

1. For Aretino’s circle, see Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1-17.

II, 55, and Introduction, p. 34; for his personality 4. Aretino died on October 20, 1556 (G. M. Mazzuin general, see P, Gauthiez, L’Arétin, Paris, 1895. chelli, La vita di Pietro Aretino, Padua, 1741, 71) z. For Aretino in these roles, see Crowe and Caval- and the dedicatory letter of the Dialogue is dated caselle, passim; F. Saxl, “Titian and Aretino,” August 12, 1557 (see T, 58). Lectures, Warburg Institute, London, 1957, I, 161ff. 5. Dizionario Biografico Universale, Florence, 1840~ 3. See Camesasca, I and II, a full collection and edi- 49, II, 66, article on Fabrini. tion of these letters; K. Vossler, ’’Pietro Aretinos 6. For these titles, see BMC, s. v. Fabrini, Giovanni.

220 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

in the 1550’s increasingly occupied with linguistic theory and with producing literary editions for the Giolito Press; the run of his publications during the fifties is a clear indication of this. Then again, Fabrini was of Tuscan origin, which made him a suitable mouthpiece for central Italian opinions on art in general and support of Michelangelo in particular (see page 2, where Aretino speaks of Fabrini’s love, as a Florentine, for his countrymen and page 5, where, in naming Vasari to Fabrini, he calls him “your own Vasari’). Finally, he had been a correspondent of Aretino’s after his arrival in Venice in 1547. The Giovanni Fabrini to whom Aretino addressed letters of June 1548 and September 1550 (Lettere, v, clxxviii; Camesasca, clxxxii) is evidently the same man. For the first of these letters contains an allusion to Terence, which matches the publication of that year by Dolce’s Fabrini (see above), and the second refers to a portrait of the Duke of Florence, an apt subject for Aretino to mention when writing to a Florentine. Giulio Camillo

The description of this man as dottissimo would seem to reflect, above and beyond politeness, Dolce’s personal association with him and his writings (see below); in point of fact, however, Camillo’s learning was never anything but cabbalistic, and may have been downright fraudulent. The poet and rhetorician in question,’ surnamed Delminio (ca. 1480-21544), came from Friuli, but was actually of Dalmatian origin. Sent to Venice as a young man to learn Italian, he was probably later at San Vito and then Udine, before he moved to Bologna to teach dialectic. He joined the court of Francis I in 1530 and passed most of his later life in France. In 1531 or 1532, however, he was back in Italy (in Venice in 1533), and again in Venice in 1544. It was probably at the latter time that he collaborated with Dolce on an edition of Petrarch, brought out by the Giolito Press in 1547 (Dolce’s own editorial work here, though it goes unmentioned in the first edition, is referred to in subsequent ones, and the 1554 Giolito edition has annotations of Camillo’s alongside those of Dolce).8 It is also known that he died in Milan, most probably in 1544, and in any case before 1552, for in that year the Giolito Press brought out his collected writings;® Dolce, who edited this publication, refers to Camillo’s death in his prefatory letter. Camillo’s most notable literary achievement was apparently his Topica, a text on elocution, and his work on the “universal theater” also deserves mention.’° More relevant

7. See G. Tiraboschi, Storia della letteratura italiana, 9. Tutte le opere di M. Giulio Camillo, Venice, 1552. Florence, 1805-12, VII, 4, pp. 1513ff., where all the 10. See on this subject Tiraboschi, op.cit., VII, 4, pp.

known facts about Camillo’s career are brought 1516ff.; J. Schlosser-Magnino, La letteratura artis-

together and discussed. tica, Florence, 1935, 211f.; R. Bernheimer, ‘*The-

8. See Cicogna, 137. atrum Mundi,’”’ AB, 38, 1956, 225ff.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 221 to the content of Dolce’s Dialogue is the fact that he popularized the Idea of the Greek rhetorician Hermogenes by producing an Italian edition of this work and an accompany-

ing exposition of its content; see on this subject p. 24 of the Introduction. This edition and exposition was evidently published only posthumously—in the 1552 volume of collected writings mentioned above; and the same applies to Camillo’s L’Idea del theatro (1555).

Aretino did indeed know Camillo personally, for his name crops up in a letter of Aretino’s dated October 1537 (Camesasca, xliii). Similarly a letter written to Aretino from Modena in April 1536 by Baldassare Altieri speaks of Camillo’s return to Italy with the Cardinal of Lorraine.4? As for Dolce’s anachronism in having the Aretino of his Dialogue mention Camillo as though he were still alive, this compares with the mention of Pietro Bembo a few lines further on (g.v.) and suggests a similar motive in both cases.

“That large canvas telling the saint’s story...” Titian’s Martyrdom of St. Peter, executed for the Church of Santi Giovanni e Paolo in Venice, is discussed in much greater detail toward the end of the Dialogue; cf. page 54 and the corresponding note. This altarpiece was lost in the church fire of 1867. It came from the middle period of

Titian’s career, was large in scale and sprang from a competition in which Titian had eclipsed two other distinguished Venetian artists, Palma Vecchio and Pordenone (cf. again C, p. 54). These factors sufficiently explain why Dolce attached such special importance to the picture that he used it to introduce his Dialogue. They would cause Vasari to pay a parallel degree of attention to it in his Vita of 1568 (Milanesi, vu, 438f.), and the same applies to many later notices which award the work special praise. “My distinguished friend”

This phrase and others like it had frequently been joined to the name of Titian in Aretino’s letters; see, for example, Camesasca, cxxii and clxii. “St. Thomas Aquinas ... along with other figures of saints”

The work of Giovanni Bellini in question actually depicted—according to its full, correct title—the Virgin enthroned with Sts. Thomas Aquinas, Gregory and Jerome, St. Catherine of Siena, the Magdalene and other minor figures. It was also destroyed in the fire of 1867; only the frame escaped burning, and survives in place today. Crowe and

11. Cited by Tiraboschi, loc.cit.

222 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Cavalcaselle, who had seen the original before the fire took place, recorded an extremely

valuable description and appreciation of it.12 Also helpful is the engraving of it by Zanotto,** which very legibly records its general composition and structure.

The altarpiece was in tempera, and was probably executed sometime in the early 1470's. It has a twofold importance in terms of the history of pictorial structure. First, it may have been the first unified pala produced in Venice with a sacra conversazione for subject. Second, it played a leading role in opening up the idea of a pyramidal composition for this theme, with a high throne and the figures of saints compressed into a narrow space on either side. The work which competes with it for precedence on both of these counts is Antonello da Messina’s altar of San Cassiano (begun in August 1475, near completion in March 1476); there is not yet any general agreement as to which of the two came first.'4 The force of Dolce’s introductory comparison of Bellini and Titian, and the qualities of Bellini’s art which he had in mind here, may perhaps be more tangibly appreciated by substituting for the lost altarpiece that of St. Vincent Ferrer. Originally, that is, it too hung in one of the side-chapels of Santi Giovanni e Paolo, and Longhi has attributed it to Bellini himself.t° If one follows Longhi in this opinion—-which means dating the work prior to 1475—it may serve as a rough stand-in in terms of handling and technique. For Titian’s apprenticeship to the Bellini and Dolce’s account of its consequences, see TC pp. 51£. Giovanni Bellini, on his death in 1526, was actually buried in Santi Giovanni e Paolo,

and this may have given an added significance to his work on view in that church. Antonio Anselmi Anselmi (?-1619) was secretary to Pietro Bembo in Rome, and later passed into the service of Ludovico Beccadelli. He was the author of some writings in verse.’® Aretino and Dolce were both familiars of his, as surviving letters make plain,‘” and Aretino used

12. J. A. Crowe and G. B. Cavalcaselle, A History of 16. See G. M. Mazzuchelli, Gli scrittori d’Italia, Painting in North Italy: Venice, Padua... etc., Brescia, 1753, I, 2, pp. 623f. For three letters from

London, 1871, I, 154-56. Bembo to Anselmi, see Lettere di M. Pietro Bembo,

13. Reproduced by G. Gronau, Giovanni Bellini, Ber- Venice, 1562, ITI, 322vV-323v.

lin, n.d., pl. 183. 17. Correspondence between Aretino and Anselmi:

14. The most recent discussion of this problem is Lettere, I, 73r (= Camesasca, xix, a letter of Feb-

found in G. Robertson, ’’The Earlier Work of Gio- ruary 6, 1537, in which Aretino mentions Bembo vanni Bellini,’” J]Warb, 23, 1960, 45-59. Robertson and also Dolce’s correspondent of 1545, Paolo

finally » leaves question(September of priority open. nner VI, Ma N aaa(1552) 54917 aie (2549), snp:the cccxxxi 1549); 77v and 157v

15. R. Longhi, Piero della Francesca e lo sviluppo (1554). See also Crowe and Cavalcaselle, II, 27f., della pittura Veneziana,” L’Arte, 17, 1914, 241-45, where the authors cite a letter in which Anselmi

and subsequent restatements of the same opinion. er ,

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 223 his standing with Michelangelo as a means of trying to obtain drawings from the latter in 1546 (Camesasca, cccxlv).

A portrait by Titian in the Thyssen Collection at Lugano has his name and the date 1550 in a non-autograph commemorative inscription on the back.*® Bembo

There can be no doubt that Pietro Bembo (1470-1547) is meant here, even though he had died eight years before the internal date of the Dialogue (see for this date, TC, p. 9). The title Monsignore makes this plain; for Pietro had been made a cardinal by Paul III In 1539.

In fact Dolce has Aretino speak of a visit to the casa di Bembo, not to the Cardinal himself. If, therefore, the latter’s house in Venice was kept up after his death by his son Torquato—as was his Paduan art collection (see below)— it may be that the house continued to be called by his name. It is possible that Dolce meant his reference to the house to be understood in this sense only. But it is far more likely that he was introducing a deliberate anachronism here, by way of a special tribute to the Cardinal’s memory. For Giulio Camillo is mentioned a few lines earlier (see above) as if he were still alive— aman who had actually died in or around 1544.

In the realm of literature one finds a number of strong links between Dolce and Bembo (whom Sansovino would later characterize as “restauratore della lingua e grande imitatore del Petrarca’’).19 An exchange of letters between the two men survives from September—October 1535,7° and in 1541 Dolce had dedicated to Bembo his edition of Boccacio’s Decameron, published by Bindoni-Pasini. In 1556 Dolce edited Bembo’s Prose

for the Giolito Press,*1 and it is clear that, for his own writings on literature and linguistic theory, he drew extensively on Bembo’s opinions and tenets (cf. p. 13 of the Introduction). In the present Dialogue alone he quotes Bembo twice (pages 5, 40).

The evidence which connects Bembo with the Venetian artistic scene is diverse in character, but has a strong continuity. The following points are the most important:

writing to Agostino Lando from Padua in April had escaped from Anselmi, published in 1548;

1537 at Bembo’s instigation, recommends Lando Cicogna compares the allusion to such a boy in the to Titian so that the latter may undertake his por- letter to Dolce of June 1539 from Jacopo Marmitta trait; Camesasca, Ixxxviii, where Aretino, writing in Padua, Lettere di diversi eccellentissimi signori, to Lando in November 1539, dwells on the success Venice, Trajano, 1542, 71.

of the work that resulted. ; 18. R. Palluchini, Tiziano, Bologna, 1954, II, 50.

Correspondence between Dolce and Anselmi: B. 19. F. Sansovino, Venetia cittd nobilissima, Venice Pino, Della nuova scielta di Lettere di diversi no- 1581, 2598 ’ bilissimi huomini, Venice, 1574, II, 107 (Dolce to 20 Lette edi M Pietro Bembo. Veni Anselmi from Padua, June 1543) and 517 (Anselmi a letter i din re y Pi tr B bo, V. 1562, IIT, 294; to Dolce from Rome). See also Cicogna, 153 and re ab areerst gf telro Bemo0, Venice, 1560, 54.

181, for a “burlesque” of Dolce’s about a boy who 21. Le Prose di M. Pietro Bembo, nelle quali si ragiona della volgar lingua, Venice, 1556.

224 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

1. The Anonimo Morelliano, probably Marcantonio Michiel, describes the collection of works of art which was to be seen in his own day in Bembo’s Paduan house.2? A large proportion of it, according to this account, consisted of antique objets d’art (bronzes, medals, etc.). And it seems certain that Titian, and other Venetian artists as well, made extensive use of this part of the collection as antique source material. 2. The altarpiece of Tobias and the Angel from Santa Caterina, Venice (now in the Accademia) bears the stemma of the Bembo family. Vasari (Milanesi, vu, 430), basing his report on a statement that Titian had personally made to him, says that Titian did a Tobias in 1507, and identifies this work with the one to be found in the Venetian church of San Marziale—wrongly, since the Tobias of the latter church (it is still there today) represents a Titian of considerably later date, most probably the early 1540’s. Ridolfi in his Meraviglie of 1648 (Von Hadeln, 1, 153) substitutes the Santa Caterina work for the San Marziale one, probably with no intention beyond filling the gap created by Vasari’s

error. There has been some disagreement as to whether the Santa Caterina work is really an autograph Titian, and most recently Gilbert has taken up afresh Boschini’s attribution of the altarpiece to Santo Zago and argued in its favor.” I believe myself that the altarpiece is indeed a creation of the young Titian, brought to completion not earlier than ca. 1512. Granted that, the stemma provides a straight piece of evidence that Bembo and Titian were in contact during the latter’s first formative period (it was Bembo, it may be noted, who invited Titian to Rome in 1513, and Titian did a portrait of him some two years later; Milanesi, vu, 437). If Gilbert’s attribution is accepted and Santo Zago was working in a Titianesque vein at the time he painted the altarpiece (cf. C, p. 48 for notices as to this artist’s career), then contact between Bembo and Venetian art is equally implied, though at a somewhat later date than the one I have put forward above.

3. It seems possible that Bembo was already in close touch with Venetian painting during his early years in the milieu of Ferrara. His Asolani came out in the middle of Giorgione’s career, and this, coupled with the current Aristotelianism of the north Italian humanists, may well have had a direct connection with the iconographic novelty of such privately commissioned works of Giorgione’s as the Tempesta, Three Philosophers and Dresden Venus.*#

The Giovanni Bellini portrait of Bembo now at Hampton Court seems datable ca. 1505.

22. Notizie d’Opere del Disegno, ed. T. Frimmel, has not so far been investigated in detail. Cf.,

Vienna, 1888, 2o0ff. however, A. Ferriguto’s research into the family

FE oo eat a ne ena artistica de miones patrons. Attraverso i misteri di Giorgione, 24. This hypothesis, suggested orally by S. Freedberg, Castelfranco, 1933.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 225 4. Bembo was certainly in close touch with Aretino while the latter was still in Rome,

and it is evident from their exchanges of letters that the relationship continued after Aretino’s move to Venice in 1527. In 1530, furthermore, Bembo was made keeper of the library of Cardinal Niceno and official historian of the Venetian republic. 5. Titian did two or more portraits of Bembo in his cardinal’s robes. Examples sur-

vive in Washington and Naples. They can be dated with certainty between 1538 and 1547, the term of Bembo’s cardinalship, and a date ca. 1540 is suggested for them by the fact that, in a letter to Girolamo Querini of March 30 that year, Bembo asked that Titian be thanked for the second portrait of him.”° Again, there exists today in the Bargello a mosaic portrait of Bembo—probably on a design by Titian—which is signed by Francesco and Valerio Zuccato (cf. for these artists C, p. 51) and dated 1542. “Insofar as his period allowed”

Dolce writes here in direct dependence upon Vasari’s thesis of the “three ages” of painting, promulgated in the first edition of his Vite (1550)—most specifically in the proemio to Part 1 (Ricci, 1, 222ff.).

Aretino himself in a letter of July 1550 (Camesasca, dlxii)—written, no doubt, after he had studied this first edition of the Vite—had discussed Giovanni Bellini as representative of a past age in painting (“i modi di gia’) and counterpointed Michelangelo as representative of the new maniera (“gli andari di alora’”’). “A heroic majesty” The use of this phrase to describe Titian’s maniera seems to correspond to the use of the term terribilita to describe Michelangelo’s. “The divine Michelangelo” Ariosto was the first (cf. page 5) to apply the epithet divino to Michelangelo in print. Aretino honors Michelangelo with the epithet, but also Dolce himself, Bembo, Raphael,

Titian, Moretto and others.*° As with Aretino, a standard compliment is being offered in the present case; the epithet has no connotation here beyond that of outstanding excellence.?7

“Many painters of distinction” The list of artists that Dolce goes on to provide, as a counterweight to the figure of

Michelangelo—Raphael, Correggio, Parmigianino, Titian, Andrea del Sarto, Perino,

25. Lettere di M. Pietro Bembo, Milan, 1809 ed., II, 27. For further references on the use of the term 316; cited by W. Suida, ‘“New Light on Titian’s divino, see E, Panofsky, Renaissance and Rena-

Portraits—II,’’ BurlM, 98, 1936, 281. scences in Western Art, Stockholm, 1960, 188 n. 1.

26. See Camesasca, III, 211 for a discussion of this usage.

226 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Pordenone—evidently derives from Vasari’s 1550 edition. In the proemio to Part m1 of this first edition of the Vite (Ricci, m1, 6ff.), Vasari lists the following as leading lights

of the “third age” of painting (with some discussion of each—in terms from which Dolce is later to borrow: see C, pp. 49f.): Leonardo, Giorgione, Fra Bartolommeo, Raphael, Andrea del Sarto, Correggio, Parmigianino, Polidoro and Maturino, Rosso, Sebastiano, Giulio Romano, Perino del Vaga, and of course Michelangelo. Leonardo, Giorgione and Giulio Romano, whom Dolce fails to mention here, are to be discussed by him at

some length on page 49. Dolce’s only “outsider” to the Vasarian list is Pordenone— included for obvious patriotic reasons (even though he and Titian had been in direct tivalry, at least in 1537-1538).78 In his 1565 Dialogo dei colori (p. 64v) Dolce offers a similar list of leading artists: Michelangelo, Raphael, Titian, Giorgione, Correggio, Parmigianino, Pordenone. In his Vita di Carlo Quinto, put out by the Giolito Press in 1567-1568, there is a still longer list, supporting the contention that the arts flourished under the reign of this Emperor. It includes (pp. 313f.): Giovanni Bellini, Giorgione, Mantegna, Leonardo, Correggio, Raphael, Giulio Romano, Parmigianino, Polidoro, Pordenone and Michelangelo. PAGE TWO

“The field of draftsmanship .. .” For the praise of Michelangelo on the grounds, above all, of his powers of disegno, cf. Castiglione, Il Cortegiano, 1, li and Vasari’s 1550 edition (passim). “The evidence of the ancient poets and historians” See Pliny, Historia Naturalis 35. 79: omnes prius genitos futurosque postea superavit

Apelles Cous. Also 35. 61: ab hoc (sc. Apollodoro) artis fores apertas Zeuxis Heracleotes intravit ... audentemque iam aliquid penicillum ...ad magnam gloriam perduxit. Compare Vasari’s account of Raphael as the third perfect artist of all time (Ricci, 11, 7): “[Raffaello] arrichi l’arte della pittura di quella intera perfezzione che ebbero anticamene le figure di Apelle, & di Zeusi.”

One may be sure that Pliny is the ultimate source in both these cases, since it is precisely in his account of the development of ancient Greek art, with its contrived coherence, that Apelles and Zeuxis are given crucial roles as the ultimate masters in the “correct” presentation of their subjects.*® There are interesting derivations from Pliny in Aretino’s letters° and in the famous one to Michelangelo of September 16, 1537

28. See Venturi, IX, 3, p. 131. 30. See G. Beccati, ‘‘Plinio e l’Aretino,”’ Arte Figura-

29. See K. Jex-Blake and E. Sellers, The Elder Pliny’s five, 2, 1946, 1-7. Chapters on the History of Art, London, 1896, p. xxix for a discussion of this.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 227 (Camesasca, xxv), the name of Michelangelo is set alongside those of Apelles, Phidias, and Parrhasius where achievement is concerned. “The excellence of those few statues...”

Compare Aretino, Camesasca, Ixxix: ‘De le scolture non parlo, con cio sia che la Grecia terrebbe quasi il pregio de la forma antica, se ella non si avesse lasciata privare de le reliquie de le sue scolture.” For the phrasing, compare P. Bembo, Prose della lingua volgar, Bk. m1 (ed. M. Marti, Padua, 1955, p. 97): “Questa citta [i.e. Rome], la quale per le sue molte e reverende reliquie, infino a questo di a noi della ingiuria delle nimiche nazioni e del tempo, non leggier nimico, lasciate ... etc.””; also Castiglione, I] Cortegiano, 1, xlix and lii, where the phrasing is again similar.

“The light of the sun...” The phrasing here recalls—at a distant remove, indeed—Neo-Platonism: for the ultimate source in Plato himself, see Republic 6. 508, etc. “That great misguider of the soundest eye”

Although Dolce does not name the author, this is a quotation from Petrarch and comes from the sonnet “Il mal mi preme, e mi spaventa il peggio” (numbered as ccxtiv in the ed. of Rigutini and Scherillo, Milan, 1918), line xi. PAGE THREE

“In his own genre—let us call it his ‘mode’ ” Compare one of the marginal captions composed by Dolce for his edition of II Corte-

giano, first published in 1552 (II Libro del Cortegiano del Conte Baldessar Castiglione, Venice, Giolito, 1556 ed., p. 62): “Leonardo, etc... . pittori tra se diversi, e perfetti nella lor maniera.”” Similarly his translation of Cicero’s De Oratore, first published in 1547, contains the following note appended to a passage in Bk. 3 (Il Dialogo del’Oratore di Cicerone, Venice, Giolito, 1552 ed., p. 276): ““La Scoltura—Moostra (sc. l’autore) che si come nella Scoltura e nella Pittura trovano artefici di diverse maniere, e ciascuno perfetto nella sua: cosi parimente aviene nell’arte del dire; che non consiste la perfettione

in una sola forma, ove si vede, quanto s’ingannano quegli che la perfetta via dello scrivere nella nostra lingua prose, indrizzano alla sola maniera del Boccacio.” The paral-

lel case of literature is put forward here in exactly the same way as in the Dialogue itself.

228 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Quintus Calaber )

A fourth century a.p. imitator of Homer from Smyrna, whose Posthomerica continued the Iliad in fifteen books, narrating the adventures of the Greek heroes up to the time of

their embarkation for home. The first printed text of this work had been put out by Aldus of Venice in 1504-1505. Apollonius Apollonius Rhodius was librarian at Alexandria from ca. 260 to ca. 247 B.c., and then

retired to Rhodes, where he remained until his death. His Argonautica narrates the ex-

pedition of the Argos to Colchis, the winning of the Golden Fleece and the return voyage. Aldus of Venice had issued an edition of this work in 1521.

“Horace makes fun of a certain fool...” see Horace, Sermones (the Satires) 1. 10, vv. 17-19: .. . quos neque pulcher / Hermogenes umquam legit, neque simius iste / nil praeter Caluum et doctus cantare Catullum.

Licinius Calvus (82-47 B.c.) was a poet and also an orator of the Attic school.

“Truth must out” Dolce’s frequent use of gnomes deserves notice; compare, for example, a few lines

earlier, “comparisons ... are . . . odious’—also used by Vasari in his 1568 edition (Milanesi, vir, 726). PAGE FOUR

“Certain daubers, who are apers of Michelangelo”

Compare Horace’s use of simius in the field of literature, cited in C, p. 3. The description of the artist as simia naturae is common in medieval writings about art; later the term simia came to mean, as here, a slavish imitator.?* This passage clearly reflects the unique and unchallenged supremacy of Michelangelo’s art in the milieu of Rome during the 1530’s and early 1540’s. It was above all the Sistine Ceiling which was the source of this supremacy. Compare the close of a letter written by Aretino in November 1537 (Camesasca, il): “. .. quei dipintori stupefatti nel mirar la Capella di Michelangelo, i quali volendo imitar la grandezza del suo fare, ne lo sforzarsi di porre ne le figure maesta, moto e spirito, scordatosi il saper di prima, non solo non entrano ne la sua maniera, ma dimenticano anco la loro.”

31. See E. R. Curtius, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, New York, 1953, 358f.; H. W. Janson, Apes and Ape-Lore, London, 1952, ch. x.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 229 “Overpowering grandeur’ The Italian term terribilita connotes both the “fearsomeness”” of Michelangelo’s figures (i.e., their capacity to inspire awe in the spectator) and their heroic grandeur. “Ease”

I have avoided the word “facility” here, because of its misleading implications of a work of art dashed off at speed. In Dolce’s text, the antithesis of facilita is arteficio or ricerca.

Dolce’s concept of facilita evidently came to him from II Cortegiano; see Intro., pp. 2o0ff,

“Art is the hiding of art's presence’ This is the familiar Latin proverb, ars est celare artem. Compare M. Vida, Poetica, Rome, 1527, i, v. 227: cunctamque potens labor acculat [occulit] artem. “We would find them similarly on his side”

For Raphael’s prestige in Rome, see Vasari’s 1550 account of this (Ricci, Iv, 340): “Aveva in questo tempo preso in Roma Raffaello da Urbino nella pittura una fama si grande, che molti amici & aderenti dicevano, che le pitture di lui, erano di quelle di Michele Agnolo, secondo Il’ordine della pittura, piu vaghe di colorito, piu belle d’invenzione, et d’arie piu vezzose, et di corrispondente disegno, talche quelle di Michele Agnolo Buonaroti non avevano, da’l disegno in fuori, nessuna di queste parti. Et per questa cagione giudicavano Raffaello essere nella pittura se non piu eccellente, di lui, almeno pari, ma nel colorito volevano che in ogni modo lo passasse. .. .” The partisanship which Vasari describes in this way persisted after Raphael’s death and lies behind the claim which Dolce puts into the mouth of Aretino here. Indeed, the various arguments for Raphael’s supremacy over Michelangelo which are advanced here and later in the Dialogue reproduce closely the arguments ascribed by Vasari to the supporters of Raphael during the artist’s lifetime. “Raphael in his lifetime was a very dear friend of mine” See Aretino’s letter to Jacopo del Giallo of May 23, 1537 (Camesasca, xxv), in which he affirms his competence as a judge of painting, citing Raphael, Sebastiano and Titian

as artists who have consulted him. Also his play La Talanta of 1542, Act Iv, Sc. 21:

230 Dolce’s ‘“Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento

“Elle [sc. the Sibyls of Santa Maria della Pace] sono di mano di Raffaello d’Urbino, con Vaffabilita del quale tenni strettissima conversazione, perocché egli aveva gran piacere nel mostrarmi le sue opere.” “The degree to which Michelangelo values my powers of judgment” Dolce goes on to refer to Aretino’s letter to Michelangelo about the subject matter of the Last Judgment. This letter (Camesasca, xxxviii) is dated September 16, 1537. Michelangelo’s reply, which Dolce also mentions (LSPA, 1, 2, cccxcvi) was actually complimentary but noncommittal in character. It should have come out in the 1551 Marcolini edition of the Lettere scritte a Pietro Aretino, but there was an oversight on the part of the editors. The Aretino-Michelangelo correspondence has been fully discussed by Ortolani.3? In

the light of the evidence brought together there and Ortolani’s convincing reconstruction of the way in which the relationship progressed, Dolce would seem to have been more intent on boosting Aretino’s reputation as an impresario than on adhering to the truth. Aretino’s abstruse allegorical program for the Last Judgment was hardly one that Michelangelo could have taken seriously, and his later attack on the completed fresco was evidently well known to Dolce, since its substance is echoed later in the Dialogue (see TC, p. 40; also Intro., pp. 27-29).

Agostino Chigi Chigi (1464-1520) was a Sienese banker who settled in Rome. His palagio referred

to here is the villa known as the Farnesina, erected for Chigi on a design by Peruzzi, and frescoed by Raphael and his school, Sebastiano, Peruzzi and Sodoma.°* Modern scholarly opinion holds that the only fresco actually by Raphael in the Farne-

sina is the Galatea (see page 43 of the Dialogue for an allusion to it). The ceiling (‘le volte”) to which Dolce expressly refers is now considered to have been executed in its entirety by followers of Raphael—on the basis (at least partially) of ideas and designs of his, but otherwise on an independent footing. In fact, in attributing the whole complex to Raphael in person, Dolce was simply following what Vasari had said in his 1550 edition (Ricci, uz, 112f.). Compare page 43, where a cartoon for the Sodoma fresco of

the Marriage of Alexander and Roxana upstairs in the Farnesina—most probably a school piece—is ascribed to Raphael himself.

32. S. Ortolani, ‘‘Pietro Aretino e Michelangelo,” L’Arte, 25, 1922, 15-26. 33. See R. Foerster, Farnesina-Studien, Rostock, 1880, 1-8 (life and character of Chigi), a11ff. (architecture), 39ff. (decorations).

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 231

: PAGE FIVE

“Bembo... put him on a par with Michelangelo” In all probability Dolce had in mind here the opening of Bk. m1 of Bembo’s Prose. The passage in question runs (ed. Marti, pp. 97f.): “Questo [sc. the study and imitation of the antique works of art and architecture which were to be seen in Rome] hanno fatto piu che altri, Monsignore M. Giulio, i vostri Michele Angelo fiorentino e Raffaello da Urbino, l’uno dipintore e scultore e architetto parimente, l’altro e dipintore e architetto altresi; e hannolo si diligentemente fatto, che amendue sono ora cosi eccellenti e cosi chiari, che pit agevole é a dire quanto essi agli antichi buoni maestri sieno prossimani, che quale di loro sia dell’altro maggiore e miglior maestro. . . .” Dolce had worked on the Prose for an edition which came out in 1556, and he seems to echo elsewhere in the Dialogue (see TC, p. 2) certain phrases of Bembo’s which occur next to the passage just cited.

If, however, this was the passage that Dolce had in mind, he was seriously inaccurate in saying that Bembo had written it when “Raphael was only a youth.” No doubt he was misled by the internal date of December 1502 which Bembo had supplied for the dialogue contained in the Prose. And it is true that Bembo may have begun research on linguistics as early as 1500. In fact, however, the first two books of the Prose were not

ready in preliminary form until ca. 1512 at the earliest. Not until after this date can Bembo have begun work on the third and last book.?* And Raphael was hardly still a giovanetto in 1512; he was in fact twenty-nine that year, and had been based in Rome for some four years. What is more, Bembo’s reference to Raphael’s activity as an architect precludes the possibility that this particular passage was composed any earlier than 1514 at the absolute outside; so the discrepancy is even more striking. The letter of Bembo’s in which Raphael’s portrait of Castiglione is mentioned dates,

it may be noted, from 1516 (Golzio, pp. 42f.). This would be an optimal date for the praise of Raphael in the Prose. “Castiglione, who gives him pride of place”

See Il Cortegiano, 1, | (Gian Cristoforo Romano is speaking): “. .. e cio tutto fate in grazia del vostro Rafaello; e forse ancor parvi che la eccellenzia che voi conoscete in lui della pittura sia tanta suprema, che la marmoraria non possa giungere a quel grado.”

34. See, for modern scholarly opinion, P. Bembo, Prose della volgar lingua, ed. Marti, p. vi. The Prose were not published complete till as late as 1525.

232 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Here again Dolce’s statement is inaccurate, since—quite apart from the fact that Castiglione’s own opinion can hardly be unequivocally deduced from words he put into the mouth of one of the four interlocutors of his Cortegiano, in a context where facilita in general is under discussion—Raphael is named elsewhere in the same book (1, xxxvii) in company with several other artists, and it is suggested that each is perfect in his own maniera. For the documentation of Castiglione’s personal friendship with Raphael, see Golzio, pp. 42f. Dolce had prepared an edition of I] Cortegiano for publication by the Giolito Press in 1552.

“Polidore Virgil... ranks him as Apelles’ equal” The passage referred to comes in the De Rerum Inventoribus libri octo, Bk. (which is entitled De origine picturae, et quis primus colores invenerit, aut penicillo pinxerit), ch. xxiv. It runs as follows (1526 ed., p. 150): Idem autor, Penicillo gloriam primus Apollodorus Atheniensi contulit. In hac illustres fuerunt Timagoras Chalcideneris [sic], Pythis, deinde Polygnotus, Aglaophontalis quoque post hos, de quibus Plinius et Fabius

Quintil. in XII. affatim scribunt, quos studio brevitatis omitto, cum praesertim tale minime sit instituti operis munus. Non silebo tamen de cive meo, qui nobis sua industria et ingenio picturam velut de integro in praesantia restituit, atque illos qui in ea olim maxime claruere, naviter vel arte refert, vel peritia aequat, adeo proprios ducit de coloribus vultus. Is est Raphael cognomine Sanctus, unde eius quoque metiri posses et mores, et vitam. Polidore Virgil (ca. 1470-1555) was a historian from Urbino who came to live in England early in the sixteenth century.?® One evident reason for his praise of Raphael is the

fact that he and the artist shared a common birthplace. The De Inventoribus appeared originally, comprising seven books only, in Paris in 1499; an eighth book was added in 1521.°°

“Vasari of Arezzo... does the same in his Lives of the Painters” Dolce had in mind here the following passage from the proemio to Part m1 of Vasari’s 1550 edition (Ricci, 1, 7): “il graziosissimo Rafaello . . . studiando le fatiche de’ maestri vecchi, & quelle de’ moderni: prese da tutti il meglio; e fattone raccolta, arrichi l’arte

35. Encyclopedia Italiana, Rome, 1934-43, XXXV, 162. 36. Ibid.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 233 della pittura di quella intera perfezzione che ebbero anticamente le figure di Apelle, & di Zeusi, e piu, se si potessi dire o mostrare l’opere di quelli a questo paragone.”

“Ariosto ... sets Michelangelo apart from other painters...”

Canto xxur of the Orlando Furioso contains the passage in question. In the first stanza of this canto Ariosto enumerates the most celebrated artists of antiquity. Then comes a stanza which is not found in the 1516 edition of the Orlando, but is included in the full text, first published in 1532. It runs as follows (Orlando Furioso secondo V'edizione di 1532, ed. C. Papini, Florence, 1903, p. 441): E quei che furo a’ nostri di, o sono ora, Leonardo, Andrea Mantegna, Gian Bellino, Duo Dossi, e quel ch’a par sculpe e colora, Michel, piu che mortale, Angel divino; Bastiano, Rafael, Tizian, ch’onora Non men Cador, che quei Venezia e Urbino; E gli altri di cui tal l’opra si vede, Qual della prisca eta si legge e crede.

Dolce had produced an edition of the Orlando Furioso for the Giolito Press, which was first published in 1542 and reissued several times between then and 1557. And he had supplied a “defense” of Ariosto for an edition published by Pasini-Bindoni as early aS 1535.

“The two Dossi of Ferrara’ That is, the brothers Giovanni and Battista de Luteri who took on the name of Dosso, a place near Mantua, and were later active in Ferrara. Their birth dates are unknown, but perhaps fell in the later 1470’s, and Giovanni, the more distinguished artist of the two, was probably the elder. He died in 1542, Battista in 1548.37

Dolce’s reference to the brothers’ training is unique in the early literature which deals with their careers and their art. Thus Vasari in his 1550 Vita of the brothers (Ricci, 1v, 233ff.) makes no reference to the training of either. There are records which point to a possible association between Giovanni and Titian at Ferrara and Mantua late in the second decade of the sixteenth century,?® and it may be that Dolce’s statement about Giovanni's training in Venice represents an unwarranted deduction which arose

37. For a discussion of the names, dates and early careers of the Dossi, see Venturi, IX, 3, pp. 991-092. 38. Ibid., p. 923.

234 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

from awareness of this contact. For Giovanni was probably in his early thirties at the time in question, and by then he should certainly have been independent of any master. Again, there are documents which seem to indicate that both Giovanni (‘“Dosso”) and Battista (“el fratel di Dosso”) were in Rome early in 1520 and in some kind of contact with Raphael (Golzio, pp. 106, 122). Here the same point applies as far as Battista is concerned. It has been suggested that he may be the Raphael garzone mentioned in a letter of September 22, 1518 from Bernardo Costabili to the Duke of Ferrara (ibid., pp. 75£.). Costabili writes here that the garzone in question, who is going to Venice to buy colors, comes from Ferrara; hence the hypothesis. But unless Battista was born much later than has been supposed up to now, he was far too old to be a garzone in 1518. And similarly with the 1520 document: there may have been contact between Battista and Raphael in Rome at this time, and it may even have amounted to Battista’s temporary presence in the Raphael shop; but Battista can hardly have been “under” an artist who was younger than he was. Once more, therefore, if this contact corresponds to the fact of which Dolce was aware, he presented it in a misleading way. In sum, his whole notice has a distinctly dubious value. Vasari speaks in his 1568 edition of a friendship between Ariosto and the Dossi (Milanesi, v, 96f.), and the fact that the poet came from Ferrara himself sufficiently explains their appearance in this “catalogue” of his. There is, however, one further case of Giovanni’s being mentioned in the early sixteenth century as a painter of note: Paolo Giovio, in the epilogue to his Dialogus de Viris Illustribus?® (not firmly datable, but later than 1527), presents him as having treated landscape painting as a genre in its own right.?° Peccadillo

The term was probably taken over by Dolce from the sixth satire of Ariosto, dedicated to Bembo, vv. 34-36 (Satire, ed. C. Berardi, Campobasso, 1918, pp. 130f.): Ed oltra questa nota, il peccadiglio Di Spagna gli danno anco, che non creda In unita del Spirito il Padre e il Figlio.

It also occurs in Paolo Pino’s Dialogo di pittura of 1548 (ed. R. and A. Palluchini, Venice, 1946, p. 132).

39. Tiraboschi, Storia, VII, 4, p. 1722. sati, La vila di Michelangelo nelle redazioni del

go. See E, H. Gombrich, ‘Renaissance Artistic Theory 1550 e del 1568, ed. P. Barocchi, Milan-Naples,

and the Development of Landscape Painting,’ 1962, IV, 1906-25.

GBA, 41, 1953, 361f. 42. For further collaborations between Michelangelo

41. For a handy summary of leading opinions on this and Sebastiano in 1532-33, see, most recently, M. subject from the 16th century down to Berenson Hirst, ‘“The Chigi Chapel in S. Maria della Pace,”’ and Wilde, with extensive quotations, sce G. Va- ]Warb, 24, 1961, 161-85. Hirst gathers the rele-

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 235 PAGE SIX

“A precious stone... can appear beautiful while it remains on its own...” Dolce may have had a special interest in gems; he was to publish in 1565 (from the Latin of C. Leonardus) a work entitled Libri tre... nei quali si tratta delle diverse sorti delle gemme che produce la natura.

“Everyone knows... that Michelangelo did designs for Sebastiano” Dolce bases himself here on Vasari’s 1550 edition, where the crucial statement runs as follows (Ricci, 1v, 341): “perilché [that is, because Raphael was currently being ex-

alted in Rome at his expense] destato l’animo di Michele Agnolo verso Sebastiano; piacendogli molto il colorito di lui, lo prese in protezzione: pensando che se egli usasse lo aiuto del disegno in Sebastiano, si potrebbe con questo mezo, senza che egli operasse, battere coloro, che tenevano tale opinione.” Vasari goes on to describe (ibid., 1v, 341f.) the collaboration of the two artists upon

the Viterbo Pieta and the Christ at the Column of San Pietro in Montorio. To what degree these two works are actually creations of Michelangelo’s is a disputed question,*" and the same applies to the Resurrection of Lazarus discussed below.*? Vasari’s evidence is acceptable in its general substance (though not the reason he gives for Michelangelo’s readiness to participate in the collaboration), since he knew Michelangelo and Sebas-

tiano personally. Scholarly inquiry therefore needs to begin with the statements he makes about the genesis of these two works. Of the Pieta he says (Milanesi, v, 568): “sebbene fu con molta diligenza finito da Sebastiano, che vi fece un paese tenebroso molto lodato, l’invenzione pero ed il cartone fu di Michelangelo.” And he writes of the Christ at the Column (Ricci, loc.cit.; Milanesi, v, 569) that a “piccolo disegno” by Michelangelo was the basis of the fresco. Vasari’s accuracy of detail in the latter instance is borne out by Michelangelo’s correspondence from August 1516, which shows that a final design of his for the Christ at the Column arrived in Rome that month.*? Sebasti-

ano was to begin his own full-size cartoon that September, whereas the fresco itself dates from between the summer of 1520 and the spring of 1524. The central terms which Vasari uses in describing the collaboration—invenzione, cartone, piccolo disegno and, for the Resurrection of Lazarus, ordine e disegno in alcune parti—are elastic in themselves, in that they allow that Sebastiano might have adapted, rather than transcribed directly, preliminary figure drawings by Michelangelo. Also the

vant documentary facts and makes the new sug- about the collaborations of this date. A fortiori, gestion that Michelangelo supplied drawings for therefore, Dolce is most unlikely to have had them the Resurrection which Sebastiano had been com- in mind as well. missioned to paint in the Chigi chapel, but never 43. K. Frey, Sammlung ausgewdahlter Briefe an Michelin fact executed. He points out appropriately, how- agniolo Buonarroti, Berlin, 1899, 30ff. ever, that Vasari himself was not well informed

236 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

followers, successors and partisans of Michelangelo in Central Italy would naturally have tended to find the hand of the master present wherever possible, and to the maximum degree possible, in all works with which his genius was at all connected. This bears on the problem at issue, in that Sebastiano in the period ca. 1516-1518 was independently going through his most Michelangelesque phase, to judge by such works as the dated Leningrad Deposition of 1516. With these considerations in mind, the reader is referred to Wilde’s attempt to correlate all the various forms of evidence available with a definitive interpretation of the sense of Vasari’s statements, and to distinguish in this light the hands of Michelangelo and Sebastiano in the various preparatory studies for the Christ at the Column that survive.** Some of the materials which Wilde discussed here represent fresh discoveries of his own; in particular, a drawing at Windsor identified as a school copy after the final Michelangelo design of 1516. Since then, Pouncey and Gere have reassigned to Michelangelo himself, with Wilde’s approval, a study for the Christ which Wilde had previously regarded as typifying the style and technique of Sebastiano.*® Freedberg has now,

within the framework of this change, elaborated a view on the question of attribution which is the absolute opposite of Wilde’s.*®

Wilde also suggested, as regards the Pieta, that two drawings from the male model now in Albertina represented preliminary studies by Michelangelo for the central figure of the Virgin.** Dussler, on the other hand, has denied this connection and attributed the drawings to Bandinelli.*®

“That absurd crow which was described by Horace” See Horace, Epistolae, 1. 3, vv. 18-20: [ne] si forte suas repetitum venerit olim / grex avium plumas, moveat cornicula risus / furtivis nudata coloribus.

“Raphael used to say tome...” The “competition” of which Dolce speaks here was the one set up between Raphael’s Transfiguration and Sebastiano’s Resurrection of Lazarus. Vasari in his 1550 edition (Ricci, 1v, 342f.) describes how the two works were put on view before the Roman pub-

lic so that a comparison could be made; the date when this took place was actually April 12, 1520, six days after Raphael’s death (Golzio, p. 125). For the Transfiguration,

see C, p. 44; the Lazarus (now in the National Gallery, London) was executed, according to Vasari, “sotto ordine e disegno in alcuni parti di Michelangelo.” 44. J. Wilde, Italian Drawings in the... British Mu- 46. S. J. Freedberg, ’ ‘Drawings for Sebastiano’ or seum, Michelangelo and his School, London, 1953, ‘Drawings by Sebastiano’: The Problem ReconCat. No. 15, pp. 27ff.; Italian Drawings .. . at sidered,’’ AB, 45, 1963, 253-58. Cf. also Freedberg’s Windsor Castle, London, 1949, Cat. No. 451. more general suggestions as to the nature of the 45. P. Pouncey and J. A. Gere, Italian Drawings in Michelangelo-Sebastiano collaboration, Painting of the .. . British Museum, Raphael and his Circle, the High Renaissance in Rome and Florence, Cam-

London, 1962, Cat. No. 276. bridge (Mass.), 1961, 374-76.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 237 The extent to which Michelangelo was responsible for the shape that the Lazarus actually took is again disputed.*® The evidence turns here (1) on a letter of July 2, 1518

from Sebastiano to Michelangelo, in which Sebastiano hopes that he will not bring shame onto Michelangelo’s head,5° and (2) on the possibility of postulating that there were once definitive preliminary studies by Michelangelo for figures in the Lazarus and of attributing to Michelangelo drawings connected with the work which do survive.®! Once work on the picture had begun, Michelangelo could certainly have provided supervision on one occasion only—in January 1518. The progress of the work between 1517, when it was first undertaken, and 1519, when it was completed, varnished and exhibited, is fully documented in the letters which went to Michelangelo from Leonardo Sellaio and Sebastiano himself (Golzio, pp. 53, 60, 71, 98f., 102). Dolce has his Aretino speak of remembered conversations with Raphael himself, in

prelude to a statement about Raphael’s sanguine attitude toward the competition. He implies, then, that Aretino had transmitted to him a firsthand knowledge of this attitude. But one should probably distrust this implication. In all likelihood Dolce’s one and

only source at this point was Vasari’s account of the competition in his 1550 Vita of Sebastiano, and what he actually did was to create a fictitious anecdote out of the straightforward historical material which that account contained. Aretino, who respected

Sebastiano’s art (see Intro., p. 29), is unlikely to have promulgated a story in which Sebastiano came out as one “che non sa[peva] disegnare.” And the speech which Dolce attributes to Raphael has, in its very flavor, a legendary ring. The terms which Vasari had applied to the Michelangelo-Sebastiano collaboration were not in themselves derogatory to Sebastiano; but Dolce, in drawing on Vasari here, takes them as a springboard for almost unqualified belittlement. It is a matter of assumption, not argument, on his part, and the assumption in question—much more overt elsewhere in Vasari®**—is inseparably bound up with the whole sixteenth century con-

cept of the work of art as a narrative figuration (cf. on this subject C, p. 17). The main figure group, since it is of primary narrative importance, is seen in this concept as standing topmost in an implicit hierarchy. Below it come the subsidiary figures, and below them the setting, as if these last were, in terms of creative ideation, tacked onto the main figure group and evolved in dependent reference to it. Hence an artist who has this group “invented” for him by a greater master only needs to add and accommodate

47. Wilde, Drawings, n. to p. 19. 50. Frey, Briefe, 104f. 48. L. Dussler, Die Zeichnungen des Michelangelo, 51. See Wilde, Drawings, Cat. Nos. 16-17.

Berlin, 1959, Cat. No. 701. 52. For Vasari’s way of describing pictures, which is

49. For a recent and full review of this problem, see very much geared to this assumption, see espeC. Gould, National Gallery Catalogues, the Six- cially S. Alpers, “Ekphrasis and Aesthetic Attifeenth Century Venetian School, London, 1959, 76- tudes in Vasari’s Lives,’’ JWarb, 23, 1960, 190-215.

238 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

to it the remaining accessory elements—an altogether less exalted and less demanding task. “The very Essence of draftsmanship” Castiglione makes frequent use of the term idea in related contexts, and Dolce probably took it over from him. “At the time when Rome was sacked by the troops of the Duke of Bourbon” Charles, Duke of Bourbon, led his troops against Rome in May 1527. Simultaneously

the allied Spanish and German troops of Charles V moved in and took Pope Clement VII prisoner.

“Restoration by Sebastiano” This passage has been taken by some®? as providing external evidence of a collaboration between Raphael and Sebastiano on the fresco of the Miracle of Bolsena—a collaboration which had first been proposed, on stylistic grounds, by Wackernagel.°* In actual fact Dolce’s text, which does not specifically name any one of the Vatican stanze,

refers unequivocally to a restoration, not a collaboration, and places this restoration after 1527, the year of the Sack of Rome. Palluchini tentatively finds evidence of restoration by Sebastiano in three heads within the Stanza della Segnatura fresco of The Em-

yeror Justinian presenting his code to Trebonianus.®° One is tempted to say that if a modern scholar, in his search for Sebastiano’s hand, can only arrive at a tentative suggestion, then Sebastiano’s restoration must have been a good deal more skillful than Dolce’s tale implies.

Some have attributed to Sebastiano the so-called head of Urban J, in oils, in the Sala di Costantino.5* But it is hardly feasible to connect this attribution and Dolce’s in any direct way, even if, as Hartt proposes, the head may actually be a portrait of Clement VII done after the Sack. Much more to the point is the evidence which suggests that, in the immediate wake of Raphael’s death, Sebastiano’s feelings about him had swung around in the direction of positive sympathy. On April 12, 1520, that is, Sebastiano

wrote Michelangelo a letter beginning: “Credo havete saputo come quel povero de Rafaello da Urbino é morto; dil che credo vi habbi despiaciuto assai, et Dio li perdoni.” And he went on to express interest in the possibility that he might himself work in the 53. E.g., the anonymous compiler of the Guida della Urbino... , Leipzig, 1839, I, 264). J. Hess (‘“RaphPinacoteca Vaticana, Vatican, 1935, 159. ael and Giulio Romano,’’ GBA, 32, 1941, 731.) sug-

Te a ae ancone’ Monatshefte fiir Kunst Beret nine, Its teas that this fresco is over the wissenschaft, Il, 1909, 319ff. fireplace in the Sala di Constantino; and the area 55. R. Palluchini, Sebastiano Viniziano, Milan, 1944, Dee stored. A ape cise weeding the Pees a asoavent had proposed that Sebastiano’s Maltese cross, it may well be that this is a portrait hand was visible in the Battle of Ostia (Rafael von of Philip Villiers de l’Isle Adam, and that one

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 239 Sala di Costantino (Golzio, pp. 125f.). So it may well be that, on the basis of this newfound sympathy, he was commissioned to restore damaged heads of Raphael’s when the time for that came round. The statement in this speech of Fabrini’s that Titian studied the Raphael frescoes “which he had never seen before” might just be a way of saying that Titian was now in Rome for the first (and only) time in his life. More probably, however, Dolce meant to suggest that it was not until 1545 that Titian was in any sense aware of what these frescoes were like. In that case he was certainly equivocating; for there is every reason to think that engravings and other secondary derivations from the Vatican cycles were available to Titian, and studied by him, long before the 1540’s. So the latent implication here seems to be of a piece with the point discussed in C, p. 53. PAGE SEVEN

“Painting is nothing other than the imitation of nature” The definition of painting as essentially imitatio naturae stands at the heart of Renaissance art theory. Compare especially Leonardo’s Trattato, m1, 411 (ed. H. Ludwig, Vienna, 1888, p. 402): “Quella pittura é piu laudabile, la quale ha piu conformita co’ la cosa imitata,” and Vasari’s statement in his 1550 edition (Ricci, 1, 117): “II principio di queste arti essere stata la istessa natura.” Dolce’s conception of imitatio naturae has nothing special or unique about it, and so there is no need to comment on what he sees it as entailing in practical terms. Elsewhere (page 24) he offers the complementary view of painting as an idealizing and embellishing agent. There were numerous passages in ancient writings on art which supported

each of these views. Panofsky and Lee have set out the philosophical background to these twin concepts and the attempts of other Renaissance theorists to meld them together.°?

“Tt fails to distinguish the painter from the poet... ,”" etc. rmcmaaas dgmmansy on tey Gege Spia gS adn The substance of the distinction which Dolce goes on to make here was one that he

had already expounded in his Osservationi of 1550, in the section of this treatise on linguistic theory which is given over to defining what Ia poetica is, and what is the func-

tion and aim of the poet. The relevant passage runs in full (Osservationi del Dolce, Venice, Giolito, 1554 ed., p. 182): ““Simile al Poeta e il Dipintore; Percioche l’uno e must therefore be dealing here with a post-1527 sense solutions to the problem at issue here. addition (ibid., 87). But Dolce did not specifically 56. See F. Hartt, ‘‘Raphacl and Giulio Romano,” AB,

ae a aoe oe mer cota es 37° E, Panofay, Hes, Floren, soz, ch- tt: Le over a fireplace. Above all, there is no pictorial cepts sometimes gives the impression that they are justification for an attribution to Sebastiano any- mutually contradictory. This may be so in Kantian were he upper Pal ofthe Donation. So nel,Xenaissance derma Hub nat tue within the framework 0 philosophy.

240 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Valtro é intento alla imitatione: dissimile in questo, che I’uno imita con le parole, e l’altro

con i colori: quello per la maggior parte cose, che s’appresentano all’animo, e questo a gliocchi: ne mancarano di quegli, che il Poeta parlante Dipintore, & all’incontro il Dipintore mutolo Poeta addimandarono.” “Some men of parts have called the painter a ‘mute poet’... ,” etc. Another standard topos; Lee has provided a full discussion of its origins and its use by Renaissance theorists of art and literature.°® “The windows of Socrates” For the description of the eyes as fenestrae animi—without any reference to Socrates —see Cicero, Tusc. Disp., 1. 20, 46. I have not been able to trace any similar or related phrase in Plato, nor is there any Greek word corresponding to the Latin fenestrae; and

anyway Dolce, who knew no Greek, is unlikely to have had any detailed familiarity with Plato, or indeed Xenophon. Socrates is referred to frequently in Cicero’s philosophical writings; so most probably Dolce carelessly failed to check up on the exact context of a striking phrase in Cicero which his memory had retained.

“‘Oft one may read the heart upon the brow’ ” From Petrarch’s sonnet “Liete e pensose, accompagnate e sole” (ed. Rigutini-Scherillo, ccxxi) where the line actually begins with ma, instead of with e as in Dolce’s version. PAGE EIGHT

Silvestro Silvestro Ganassi called dal Fontego, who came from Bergamo, was the author of La Fontegara (Venice, 1535), a treatise on learning the flute, and Regola rubertina (Venice, 1542-1543), a treatise on the viol.°° He is also referred to in Paolo Pino’s Dialogue (ed. Palluchini, p. 149): “quasi che mi accordavo di Silvestro dal fondago nipote della pittura, per esser figliuolo della musica,

sirrochia dell’arte nostra. Costui ha un intelletto divino, tutto elevato, tutto virtu, & e buon pittore.” But this community of reference does not necessarily mean that Dolce used Pino as a direct source in the compilation of his own Dialogue; it may just be that Silvestro was very well known in Venetian humanist circles as a man who was both musician and painter.

58. Op.cit.

59. See the article on him in Grove’s Dictionary of Music and Musicians, London, 1954, III, 560.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 241 “The truth, in the service of which ...I1 have often unsheathed against princes the sword of my intellect...” The allusion seems to be to Aretino’s motto, Veritas odium parit, and to the legend flagellum principum which he had inscribed on medals of himself. PAGE NINE

“Some undefinable extra quality always accompanies the spoken word” Presumably another gnome.

“You who have never laid hands on a paintbrush” Apparently Aretino had in fact practiced painting at an early stage in his career. For in the first book that he brought out, his Opera Nova of 1512, he is called pictore within

the title itself and “‘studioso ... in pictura” in the notice which prefaces his sonnets (Opera nova del fecundissimo giovene Pietro Pictore Arretino, zoe strambotti, sonetti, capitoli, Venice, 1512). And again there is a text of 1532 by M. Sanudo which addresses Aretino and includes the lines: ““O quanto tu saria piu frutto e lode / non avessi lassato il tuo pennello / se pintor fusto un tempo, come io odo” (Capitoli contra Pietro Aretino yosto sopra una colonna a Rialto di novembre 1532, Bibl. Marciana cod. cl. 1. it., No. 369).°° Evidently Dolce either did not know of this fact from the relatively distant past, or else chose to ignore it for the purposes of his argument.

“There is... only one Aretino” Compare Camesasca, lvi: “Ne si trova altro che... un Dolce al mondo”; Dolce here returns the compliment.

For the claim which Dolce has his Aretino make here—the claim that a non-artist such as himself can judge painting—compare Aretino’s own letter to Jacopo del Giallo of May, 1537 (Camesasca, xxv): “Io non sono cieco nella pittura ... etc.” Also the words in Aretino’s play of 1542, La Talanta (Act tv, Sc. 21): ““Avvenga che solo colui che non é pittore, et non ha giudicio ne dipingere, giudica senza scrupulo.” “‘Tirst painter whom antiquity records’ ” Petrarch, Trionfo della Fama, 3.15.

60. These two pieces of evidence were cited and discussed by A. Luzio, Pietro Aretino nei primi suoi anni a Venezia e la Corte dei Gonzaga, Turin, 1888, 109; see also Camesasca, III, 120f.

242, Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

“The preparations made for the coming of the Queen of Poland’ Bonna Sforza, daughter of Gian Galeazzo Sforza, Duke of Milan, and Isabel of Aragon, and wife of King Sigismund I of Poland arrived in Venice in 1555 and died there in 1558. Sansovino in his text of 1581 also refers to the reception arranged in her honor (Venetia citta nobilissima, Venice, 1581, pp. 161V-162r). At least one commentator has taken this reference within the Dialogue to an event

of 1555 as implying that the entire text was composed two years before it was published. However it seems to me all but certain that Dolce is here (after the fashion of other composers of such “dramatic” dialogues, and in terms unmistakable to his contemporary readers), providing a date for the internal action of his piece which takes cognizance of the fact that Aretino had died in 1556. Writing, that is, what is in large measure a memorial tribute to the activities of a man who had died only recently, he puts in this touch to avoid any discrepancy between the sense of immediate contemporaneity which his dramatization conveys, and the leading and “living” role of Aretino within it. If this interpretation is right, it follows that at least this particular section of the Dialogue cannot have been composed before late 1556 or 1557. PAGE TEN

“The eye cannot be deceived in its perception” Compare Leonardo’s chapter heading to his Trattato, 1, 11 (ed. Ludwig, 1, 16): “Come l’occhio meno s’inganna nelli suoi essercizii, che nessun altro senso.”

Fabrini is to reply, in his next speech, that the eye, on the contrary, “is very often deceived by some outward show (apparenza).” Aretino then counters by affirming that in such cases the error is due to lack of practical experience (pratica). Simultaneously, however, he retreats from his original, categorical statement that the eye cannot be de-

ceived unless there is something physically wrong with it to a position akin to Leonardo’s. “The intellect is more prone to deception than the eye,” he now says, and again, inversely, that the eye is as “an instrument less subject to error [sc. than the other senses]” (my italics)—a statement which is exactly comparable to the one of Leonardo’s quoted above. The workings of perception and cognition were a favored subject of philosophical debate in Dolce’s time, and he draws here on the material of these discussions. All of them have at their core what Ryle has called the fallacy of the Ghost in the Machine:*?

61. G. Ryle, The Concept of Mind, Oxford, 1949.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 243 that is, the assumption that the functions of the “eye” and the “intellect” can somehow be separated from one another—the former to be treated as “mechanistic” in its operation, the latter as “non-mechanistic.” Dolce practices this very separation when he has Aretino say: “the eye and the intellect are really different things.” Significantly, he then brings up in Fabrini’s reply what is in effect the central ““common-sense” objection to

this thesis. In the everyday world, that is, there are well-known and familiar cases where the eye is “deceived by appearances”; the sort of example one would choose today is the stick which, while “actually” straight, “appears” crooked when it is half submerged in a river. But Dolce, having touched on this source of difficulty, at once evades its implications. It is a difficulty which Dolce’s more philosophically able contemporaries would have responded to as follows. They would have argued following Plato, for ultimate, objective standards of “correctness of perception’”—implicitly iden-

tifying this ultimate “correctness” with a full awareness of “the beautiful” as manifested in the natural world. And they would simultaneously have argued, following Aristotle, for man’s “potential” (“latent”) ability to attain this latter goal—contending that he progresses toward it through pratica, a “training’’ which, with its “spiritual” guidance, will ultimately remove his susceptibility to “materialistic” error. The attempt

on the part of Renaissance thinkers to merge Plato and Aristotle in this sort of way mainly derives from the philosophical writings of Cicero, which served as a direct source.

“Man, of his nature, desires what is good” Dolce, having just previously picked up one main thread in contemporary “‘philoso-

phy of the mind” (see above), here grasps the second also. Man has in him an innate “impulse” toward “the good,” though lack of “spiritual” training may lead him to misidentify this “good,” and so necessarily choose “evil” in its place. The two threads are, however, not even remotely brought together. It would seem that, in order to provide an argument at this point in his Dialogue, Dolce set about reproducing the gist of contentions which (always within a narrow framework) went this way and that in his time. But his limited intelligence kept him from actually doing more than borrowing a few gnomic utterances which would give his ensuing thesis the air of having a philosophical backing. And his “argument” drifts, in fact, toward evasion rather than resolution. It is not Dolce’s lack of originality that I am criticizing here; rather his inability to recreate the thought of others with any kind of a sustained coherence.

244 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

“That is why Cicero said...” The passage referred to comes in the De Oratore (which Dolce had translated for the Giolito Press in 1547), 3.197: Mirabile est, cum plurimum in faciendo intersit inter dictum et rudem, quam non multum differat in iudicando. “Apelles would expose his figures to the criticism of all comers” From Pliny, Hist. Nat. 34. 84: Idem perfecta opera proponebat in pergula transeuntibus. Dolce omits, however, the qualifying episode with which Pliny continues: a cobbler

was told by Apelles not to go, in his criticism, “beyond his last’’—the last which was the acknowledged focus of his expertise. PAGE ELEVEN

“Aristotle wrote on poetics ..., on the art of rhetoric... , he also wrote on animals” Two translations of the Poetics of Aristotle appeared in Italy in 1549 (one anonymous, one by B. Segni), and a third (by B. L’Imperiale) in 1551. Brunetto Latini issued a translation of the Rhetoric into the vernacular in 1541; four other translations followed soon after (anonymous, 1548 and 1549; B. Segni, 1549; B. L’Imperiale, 1551). The Parva Naturalia, which incorporates Aristotle’s various treatises on animals, was not similarly translated, except by B. Segni in an unprinted and undated version.® “Pliny wrote treatises on precious stones, on statues and on painting” Books 33 to 37 of the Historia Naturalis of Pliny the Elder discuss at length mineralogy and metallurgy and their use in the arts: Book 34 deals with bronze statuary, Book 36 with sculpture in stone and marble, and Book 35 with painting, while gems are discussed in Book 37.

Cristoforo Landino had issued in 1476 a Venetian edition of Pliny which had very wide currency.

“Some men...are given to believing that [painting] is a mechanical art’ The discussion as to whether painting and sculpture should be classified as “liberal” or “mechanical” arts goes back to Plato, who excluded the two from his ideal state, and to Aristotle, who considered their part in a liberal educational program (Politics, 8. 2, 3). Thereafter the ancients—excepting Galenus—consistently excluded the two from the list of liberal arts. In the Renaissance the case for holding painters in esteem was taken up afresh—in the Quattrocento by Alberti, Francesco di Giorgio, Giovanni Santi and

62. All of this information about translations of Aris-

totle is taken from R. R. Bolgar, The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries, Cambridge, 1954, Apx. II, 509-11.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 245 Leonardo (who was the first to set painting highest among the arts), and in the Cinquecento by Lancilotto, Gaurico and others. The dialogues of Pino, Biondo and Doni all allude to the debate at some length; compare also I] Cortegiano, 1, xlix and Vasari’s proemio to Part 1 of his 1550 text.® “ Alexander the Great valued the wonderful excellence of Apelles in such a way that he made him a gift... of his well-loved mistress Campaspe”’ From Pliny, Hist. Nat. 35. 86f. Vasari has the story in his 1550 edition (Ricci, 1, 13) and it also comes in Castiglione’s Cortegiano (1, lii f.). The name of Alexander’s mistress is given in the best manuscripts of Pliny as Pancaspe; Aelian calls her Pancaste (Hist. Var. 12. 34) and Lucian Pacate (Imagines 7). Castiglione, Pino, Vasari and Dolce, however, all name her Campaspe, following in this respect Cristoforo Landino’s translation of Pliny, which had come out in Venice in 1476, and other subsequent translations. The “moral” offered by Dolce (“the gift of one’s personal attachments means more than kingdoms or crowns”) is exactly the one offered by Castiglione, but differs in its wording from the one which Pliny himself had given (Dono dedit ei magnus animo, maior imperio sui, nec minor hoc facto quam victoria aliqua quippe se visit, nec torum tantum suum, sed etiam adfectum donavit artificio). This is a good example of Dolce’s

tendency to cull an anecdote from a contemporary who had used it before him, rather than from the text in which it originally figured.

“Shortly afterwards [Alexander] decreed that no one other than Apelles should be allowed to paint him from the life” From Pliny, op.cit., 35. 85 and also 7. 125. Cf. also Horace, Epist. 2. 1, 239. Dolce had offered the same anecdote earlier, in the preface he had written for a publication of 1554 (Le Transformationi di M. Lodovico Dolce, Venice, Giolito, 1561 ed., n.p.). PAGE TWELVE

“King Demetrius came to be encamped at Rhodes with a large army... ,” etc. From Pliny, op.cit., 35.104 and also 7. 126. The picture was of Ialysus, as a huntsman. It was lodged in the temple of Dionysus just outside the city (Strabo, x1v, 652)—that is, the new city of Rhodes founded in 408 s.c. Castiglione gives the anecdote in his Cortegiano (1, lii).

: 63. For the general subject of painting as a liberal art, see A. Blunt, Artistic Theory in Italy, 1450-1600, Oxford, 1940, ch. iv.

246 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

“Apelles...wastaken...to the banquet of a certain king... ,” etc. From Pliny, Hist. Nat. 35. 89. The king was Ptolemy, and Pliny says that his fool was responsible for the invitation. Lucian gives a fuller version of the story (Diabol., 4) and says that Apelles painted his famous Calumny in revenge.

“The Fabii... were bearers of the cognomen Pictor...” From Pliny, op.cit., 35. 19. Cf. Il Cortegiano, 1, xlix. Vasari in his 1550 edition (Ricci, 1,114f.) has the story somewhat wrong.

“Messala the orator arranged for [Quintus Pedius] to learn painting” From Pliny, op.cit., 35. 21, where the co-heirship with Octavius (the emperor Augustus) is mentioned. Cf. Suetonius, Divus Julius, 83. “Pacuvius, poet of antiquity” From Pliny, op.cit., 35. 19. “Demosthenes, prince of Greek orators”

I have not been able to trace any ancient authority for the statement that Demosthenes studied painting. It is possible that Dolce had misinterpreted a passage about Demosthenes in the De Oratore of Cicero. It runs, in Dolce’s own translation of 1547 (Il Dialogo del’Oratore di Cicerone, Venice, 1550 ed., p. 110; cf. 1. 260 in the Latin original): “Non poteva dell’Arte, ch’egli studiava, proferire la prima lettera.” In fact the arte in question is rhetoric; for the immediately preceding words allude to the impediment of speech which afflicted Demosthenes in his early years. But Dolce might have misunderstood it as painting. Alternatively, the analogy between the language of Demosthenes and the language of painting which Longinus, in particular, had developed, may have given rise to a legend of which Dolce availed himself. “Metrodorus, who was both a painter and a philosopher’ From Pliny, op.cit., 35. 135. Castiglione cites this double talent of Metrodorus’s in his Cortegiano (1, lii) and so does Aretino in a letter to Vasari of June 1537 (Camesasca, xi). “Our own Dante learned to draw” Erom Leonardo Bruni’s Vita of Dante (J. R. Smith, The Earliest Lives of Dante, New

York, 1901, p. 90). Less directly comparable is Dante’s own description in the Vita Nuova (34. 1) of how he came to draw an angel.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 247 The short life of Dante which Dolce had composed for the 1555 Giolito edition of the Divina Commedia contains the same statement (Paris, 1787 ed., p. viii). “Monsignore Barbaro, the patriarch elect of Aquileia” Daniele Barbaro (1513-1570) had been ambassador to Edward VI in London, before he became patriarch elect in 1550; see LSPA, u, cxi (1549) and cccxii (1550). He never in fact took up the office of patriarch, since he died before the current holder.®* His published works included: a Latin commentary on Porphyry (Venice, 1542); a dialogue Dell’eloquenza (Venice, 1557); a treatise on La pratica della perspettiva, Venice, 1568; and, of special interest where the present Dialogue is concerned—since Dolce at one point later in his text appears to have drawn on the work (see C, p. 29)—a translation of Vitruvius, together with an important commentary, which first came out in Venice (issued by Marcolini) in 1556.

It is also interesting that he was active in the 1550’s as an architectural and artistic designer. In 1553-1554 he furnished the compositional scheme for Ponchino’s work in the Palazzo Ducale, and he designed a palace at Murano for Camillo Trevisan around 1555." Aretino, who corresponded with him between 1542 and 1550 and with special regularity in the period 1545-1548, in one letter recommended the sculptor Danese to him for his Villa di Terra Firma at Maser (Camesasca, cdlxvi). Titian did portraits of him, and one of these is referred in a letter of February 1545 from Aretino to Paolo Giovio (ibid., ccvii); the version in question may be the one now at Ottawa. PAGE THIRTEEN

Francesco Morosini

Of this particular member of the distinguished Morosini family nothing appears to be known. There are, however, records of contact between Titian, Aretino and other members of the family during what was presumably, on the basis of this notice, Francesco’s lifetime. Sansovino records a decoration by Titian—a fresco of Hercules, now lost—on the house-front of the Morosini palace in the Rio di San Canciano (Venetia citta nobilissima, 1663 ed., p. 391). Aretino corresponded with Marcantonio Morosini in July 1545, July 1546, October 1549 and August 1550 (Camesasca ccxliii, cccl, dxxxiii,

dixxi), and the first of these letters concerns a portrait of Marcantonio by Titian, who also appears to have done a portrait of the Doge Domenico Morosini.®? Finally, both

64. Encyclopedia Italiana, VI, 32. 67. See S. Poglayen-Neuwall, ‘Tizian-Studien,” 65. Camesasca, III, 292, 416. Mitinchner Jahrbuch fiir Bildende Kunst, 4, 1927,

66. See Beroqui, goff. Soff.

248 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Marcantonio and Domenico figure as holding a colloquium, in the company of Aretino, Navagero and Daniele Barbaro, in Sperone’s Dialogo della fortuna, first published in

1542.88 |

Alessandro Contarini

The recipient of Dolce’s letter describing Titian’s Venus and Adonis (translated at pp. 65ff.). Since Dolce speaks of the picture there as “poco tempo adietro fatta e mandata,” and one knows that it was sent off in September 1554 (see C, p. 55), the letter can be dated on this basis to late 1554 or early 1555. Contarini was Procurator of Saint Mark’s after 1538, and also held the official post of steward and captain general to the Venetian armed forces (Milanesi, v1, 537). He was responsible for purchasing from Titian and presenting to the Signoria a painting of the Supper at Emmaus which was to hang in the Chiesetta dei Pregadi within the Palazzo Ducale (ibid., vu, 439; Von Hadeln, 1, 166). This picture represented a secondary version

of the Supper, now in the Louvre, which Titian had painted for the Maffei family of Verona. It probably corresponds to the version now at Brocklesbury Park.® The 1556 edition of Dolce’s Osservazioni contains, in a prefatory passage which refers to prominent Venetian letterati of the day, the following complimentary allusion to Contarini (p. 15): “Oltre a gli ornamenti delle lettere, & alla eccellenza della Poesia, e di diversi altre virtu, dell’utile godimento, che si cava delle medaglie degli antichi, di camei de’ disegni di rame, e di mano di eccellenti Pittori, grandemente si diletta.” This compliment does not figure in the original edition of 1550, nor in that of 1554. So it was evidently inserted between 1554 and 1556, close on the date of Dolce’s letter to Conta-

rini. In making this insertion, Dolce was presumably reinforcing the impression of a friendly association between himself and Contarini conveyed by the letter itself, or even

thanking Contarini in a formal way for serving as the addressee of an “open” letter. Sansovino similarly calls Contarini “‘raro e cortesissimo gentil’uomo” and says that he owned a fine collection of medals (Delle cose notabili che sono in Venetia, Venice, 1565 ed., p. 21v).

“Charles the Fifth ... summoned Titian to his court twice over’ Titian’s visits to the court of Charles V are documented as follows: 1. Between October 1529 and March 1530 the Emperor’s first meeting with Clement VII took place at Bologna. Vasari in his 1568 account of Titian’s works tells of a visit

68. Crowe and Cavalcaselle, II, 106.

69. See K. T. Parker, “La Cena a Emmaus di Tiziano a Brocklesbury Park,’’ AVeneta, 6, 1952, 19ff.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 249 by the artist at this date (Milanesi, vu, 440). His narrative on the subject begins “‘dicesi. . .”, which indicates that he was drawing on hearsay here and not on any firsthand authority. But Titian’s presence at the court toward the end of the Emperor's stay in Bologna appears to be confirmed by a letter of March 18, 1530 to the Duke of Urbino from his minister in Venice, Gian Giacomo Leonardi (G. Gronau, Documenti artistict Urbinati, Florence, 1935, p. 85). According to this letter, Federico, Duke of Mantua was responsible for calling Titian to the court to do a portrait of the Emperor, for which the artist was poorly recompensed; so one may suppose that the visit was not a complete success. For Vasari’s corresponding ascription of a portrait of the Emperor to this visit

and his erroneous statement that the visit was initiated by the Cardinal Ippolito de’ Medici, see the next section of the Commentary.

2. Late in 1532 Charles V returned to Italy, and on December 13 he entered Boloena.’ Letters written from Bologna to the Duke of Ferrara by Matteo Casella, agent for the Estes there, show that Titian was at the court in the first half of January, 1533 (G. Campori, Tiziano e gli Estensi, Florence, 1874, pp. 21ff.). On February 28, the day of the Emperor’s departure, Girolamo Negrino wrote to Federico, Duke of Mantua of how Titian and the sculptor Alfonso Lombardi had had a farewell audience and received 500 scudi apiece (W. Braghirolli, “Tiziano alla Corte dei Gonzaga di Mantova,” Afti e memorie dell’ Accademia Vergiliana di Mantova, vu, 1881, 81). And Titian himself, still at Bologna on March 10, informed Federico in a letter of that date that he was taking back to Venice his portrait of the Emperor so that he could prepare a copy of it (Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1, 456f.).

It is clear that Charles himself was directly responsible for this visit. On his arrival at Mantua in November 1532 he had been enormously impressed by Titian’s portrait of Federico (see Camesasca, Ixvii); so much so, that on November 7 the Duke wrote to Titian, begging him to come there (Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1, 456). Obviously the Em-

peror’s desire to have Titian do a comparable portrait of himself was what provoked this letter and, as a consequence, brought Titian to Bologna rather than Mantua. So even if—as may perhaps be inferred from Vasari (see below)—it was Ippolito de’ Medici, a man of high standing within the court, who actually worked on bringing Titian to Bologna, he was surely acting on the Emperor’s own instructions here.

3. Between January and October 1548 Titian was with the Imperial court at Augsburg.”4 This visit too was evidently engineered by the Emperor himself. See the letter

70. See, for this date, Beroqui, 48. 71. Crowe and Cavalcascelle, Il, 167ff.

250 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

sent to Mendoza from Augsburg on October 21, 1547 (CSP, 1x, 181), in which Charles expressed his desire that Titian should come to touch up his portrait of the dead Empress —-that is, one of the two portraits which had been dispatched in October 1545 (ibid, vill, 258, letters 144-145) and had evidently been damaged on the road. Compare also

Aretino’s letter to Titian of December 1547 on the subject of his going to the court (Camesasca, ccclxxix) and Count Girolamo della Torre’s of January 6, 1548 to the Cardinal of Trent, presenting Titian as ““chiamato da S. M® per far qualche opera” (Crowe and Cavalcaselle, m1, 502f.).

4. Lastly, between November 1550 and August 1551 Titian was once more at Augsburg.” Despite the fact that a letter of Melancthon’s names Charles as responsible for this visit,’? it was evidently initiated by the young Philip rather than by Charles himself; see on this point C, p. 13. Now Dolce explicitly says that Charles V invited Titian twice. And though there were four visits in all, the evidence just reviewed shows that Charles did not in fact initiate either the first or the fourth. Furthermore, there are known facts about the two middle visits which match Dolce’s ensuing account of how Titian fared at the Emperor’s hands. He speaks of court honors (privilegi), and these were awarded to Titian in 1533—not at Bologna, but in a patent which the Emperor issued on May 10, as soon as he was back

in Barcelona (F. Beltrame, Cenni illustrativi sul monumento a Tiziano Vecellio..., Venice, 1852, pp. 99-103). He speaks of “subsistence” paid to the artist on a tremendous scale, and there is, from the 1548 visit, a patent of June 10 in which the Emperor doubled Titian’s pension (J. W. Gaye, Carteggio inedito d’artisti ..., Florence, 18391840, 1, 360ff.). And finally he speaks of a portrait of the Emperor which Titian painted at Bologna. This, as I point out in the next section of my Commentary, must almost certainly refer to 1533 once more. Everything, then, combines to suggest that what Dolce says here relates to Titian’s second and third visits to the court. “A single portrait which Titian did for him at Bologna” The source for this particular detail in Dolce’s account of Titian and Charles V may have been a passage in Vasari’s 1550 Vita of the sculptor Alfonso Lombardi (Ricci, m1, 226): “Venne in questo tempo I’Imperatore Carlo V. a Bologna; perche Tiziano da Cador _.. venne a ritrarre sua Maesta; onde ebbe Alfonso anch’egli via d’entrare per mezo di

72. Ibid., Il, 197ff. 1889, 184, No. 35. 73. Venturi, IX, 3, pp. 153f. gives the original text of 76. H. Hymans, Lucas Vorsterman, Catalogue rai-

the passage in question; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, sonné de son oeuvre, Brussels, 1893, No. 150; G. II, z0of. give the same passage in translation and Gliick, ‘‘Bildnisse aus dem Hause Habsburg, III: say that the letter (undated) is probably of Janu- Kaiser Karl V,’’ Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen

ary 1550. Sammlungen in Wien, 11, 1937, pl. 181.

74. This was pointed out by Von Hadeln, I, 171 n. 1. 77. Ridolfi’s contribution here (Von Hadeln, I, 170f.)

75. C. Justi, ‘Verzeichnis des frither in Spanien carries no weight. Misunderstanding Vasari, he befindlichen . . . Gemialde Tizians,“” Jahrbuch took the latter’s portrait in armor to be the der kéniglich preussischen Kunstsammlungen, 10, Charles V on Horseback of 1548. So his dating of

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 251 Tiziano: e di rilievo comincio un ritratto quanto il vivo di quegli stucchi: et tanto con grazia espresse la effigie di quello: che... de’ mille scudi, che l’Imperatore dono a Tiziano, esso n’ebbe in sua parte cinquecento.” The reference here must be to the Emperor's second stay in Bologna, that of December 1532—February 1533, since the letter of Girolamo Negrino cited in the preceding section establishes that it was on that occasion that Titian and Lombardi were present at the court together, and confirms the Vasarian figure of 500 scudi paid to each for their work. Dolce names the same total sum of a thousand scudi, though he does not mention the split with Lombardi; and he says specifically that it was for a portrait done at Bologna. So even if he was not drawing on Vasari here, but on an independent source (as in his other details of Titian’s success with the Emperor), the same work was almost certainly in question: Charles V with a Dog, which is now in the Prado (Tietze, pl. 94). Aretino had praised in a letter of November 7, 1537 (Camesasca, xlvii) a portrait of the Emperor painted by Titian at Bologna, and the same applies there as well. Titian had brought the Prado picture back to Venice in 1533 so that he could make a replica of it, and this latter version was not sent to Mantua till after 1536 (Gaye, Carteggio, u, 262); so Aretino would have been very familiar with it. The only other possibility, both with Dolce and with Aretino, would be a portrait done on the first visit to Bologna. Vasari’s hearsay account of this visit (Milanesi, vu, 440) seems to contain a hard core of fact. What he says about Alfonso Lombardi and the payment made to Titian represents details erroneously transferred from the visit of 1532-1533 (see above). And the same is probably true of his statement that it was Ippolito de’ Medici who called Titian to the court; for he had named Ippolito as a man of influence at the court in his 1550 account of Lombardi’s visit to Bologna (Ricci, m1, 226). When these details are eliminated, however, there remain two assertions, both of which appear to be confirmed by the letter of Gian Giacomo Leonardi’s cited in the preceding section of my Commentary: (1) Titian was at the court in 1530, and (2) he did a portrait of the Emperor then. Now Vasari says of this portrait that it showed the Emperor “tutto

armato.” And there is a lost Titian which suggests itself here—one which showed Charles V armed and carrying a sword.'* The portrait in question was at the Prado in 1614 and subsequently in the Madrid palace;’° Rubens did a copy of it, also lost, but recorded in an engraving by Lucas Vorsterman.‘® Since the imagery of this Titian fits, and there is no prima facie case for dating it differently,” one can very reasonably conthis 1548 portrait to 1530 does not justify moving Augsburger Kaiserbildnisse,’” Kunstgeschichtliche the portrait in armor to the first Augsburg visit. Studien fitr Hans Kaufmann, Berlin, 1056, 102ff. All who have dealt with the lost Titian over the These authors, however, basically rest their case last thirty years have, to my knowledge, dated it on denial of the 1530 visit (following Crowe and later than 1530. See, in particular, the following Cavalcaselle, I, 367) and/or on the passage in Rispecial studies: A. Scharf, ‘“Rubens’ Portraits of dolfi discussed above. So one cannot say that they Charles V and Isabella,’’ BurlM, 66, 1935, 250ff.; have produced any decisive arguments, and Von

Gliick, op.cit., 165ff.; G. Smolka, ‘‘Das verschol- Hadeln’s proposal is still as feasible as it was lene Kaiserportrait Tizians von 1548,’ Historisches originally; I am grateful to J. Wilde for pointing Jahrbuch, 74, 1955, 703ff.; W. Braunfels, ‘“Tizians this out to me.

252 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

nect it with the Vasarian reference. It would then be the final link in a chain of facts confirming the 1530 visit. Even if one makes this connection, however, it is unlikely that Dolce could be referring to the portrait in armor. For though Vasari (Milanesi, vu, 449) and Ridolfi after him (Von Hadeln, 1, 180) say that Titian received a thousand scudi for each portrait of the Emperor that he did, Leonardi’s letter charges the Emperor with having paid only “one ducat” in 1530. So payment on the sort of scale which Dolce records does not fit with that visit at all. Duke Alfonso of Ferrara

Titian was in contact with Ferrara from 1516 on and stayed at the court of Duke Alfonso I several times over between then and 1534, the year of the Duke’s death."® The story about Michelangelo which Dolce goes on to tell provides a terminus ante quem for Titian’s portrait of the Duke, which is not dated by any known document; for it was in 1529 that Michelangelo visited Ferrara and saw this work (Milanesi, vu, 194 and 369). The same story had been told by Vasari in his 1550 edition (Ricci, m1, 442), and by Aretino at an even earlier date. For it appears in the latter’s comedy of 1534, La Cortigiana (Act 1, Sc. 7): “Lo stupendo Michelangelo lodo con istupore il ritratto dal

Duca di Ferrara translato de lo Imperadore appresso di se stesso.” As the second half of this quotation records, the portrait in question passed to Charles V in 1533 and was taken by him to Spain.’? It may be the one of Alfonso now in the Metropolitan Museum, New York (Tietze, pl. 75); but this is quite uncertain.®° King Philip Philip II of Spain, son of Charles V and Isabella of Portugal, married Queen Mary of England in 1554.

78. Venturi, IX, 3, pp. 103-6, 108-17. Grande. See Portraits of Philip II of Spain and

v9. Ibid., IX, 3, pp. 133-34, where the documents on Francis I of France, London, Bradbury, Agnew this change of ownership are brought together. and Co., 1912. This pamphlet also contains an ac80. See H. B. Wehle, Metropolitan Museum, New count of how, during, Tenbach $ ceaning of the

York: Catalogue of Italian . .. Paintings, New Cincinnati portrait, “the beautiful crown ap’ k ’ led £ the lett (otherwise unpub- tion of this version (II, 206) which shows that, St. For my funk Be © t © feme4rs XO hol ee thei before cleaning, it corresponded to the one in lished an ot Titia ° hich ape 6c . ars En lish Stockholm in terms of landscape background (now writings a out itian) which appear In an B. missing) as well as cap. If the crown is authentic,

York, 1940, 192f. peared.’’ Crowe and Cavalcaselle give a descrip-

translation in the Calendar of State Papers series, therefore, this makes the status of the Stockholm I am indebted to Mr. Cecil Gould. Fe ronan version very puzzling indeed. The Cincinnati verthem to my eh hes in a . the Frick Cc Nection sion is certainly, as one sees it today, much dam-

Philip en wc ° Pals a ° wh t f, Hows 4 aged and restored. Even so, however, it conveys

New yore in 1960. Non whi h he a dei that very strongly the impression of an autograph Tinumber o he "heise tthe. - ° ver ts: - am tian which was left unfinished. This in itself suglecture, tee the ham f ° 1] ese wae th "le this gests a matrix version, painted from the life; and most grateful to him for a owing me to co i neither the sitter’s age nor the handling support 82. As suggested by Gould, loc.cit. Cf. also Beroqui, in any clear-cut way A. L. Mayer’s proposal 97 n. 4. But Beroqui’s suggestion that the Milan (‘Tizianstudien,” Miinchner Jahrbuch der bildende portrait which went to Philip corresponds to the Kunst, 2, 1925, 267ff.) that it should be dated to version of the Cincinnati portrait which is now in the mid-1550’s. Compare, for example, the hanStockholm (and has a cap in lieu of a crown) is dling one finds in the 1543 portrait of Benedetto

founded on a confusion as to provenance. It was Varchi. the Cincinnati version which belonged to the Casa The two secondary versions of the Milan por-

Barbarigo and consequently can be traced back to trait mentioned in July 1549 evidently preceded a 1576 inventory of Titian’s house on the Biri

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 253 Titian was first in contact with him when he went to Milan at the very end of 1548 to paint his portrait (see Camesasca, xdii, xdviii). It is clear that it was Philip himself who organized this visit. For on December 17, 1548 Titian wrote to Granvella that he was about to leave for Milan, ““essendo stato richiesto dal serenissimo nostro signor principe di Spagna” (M. Zarco del Valle, “Unver6ffentliche Beitrage zur Geschichte der Kunstbestrebungen Karl V und Philipp IL,” Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des allerhéchsten Kaiserhauses, vil, 1888, 226). Again, Mendoza wrote to Philip from Venice on July 9, 1549 about the completion and impending dispatch of a portrait —clearly the one undertaken in Milan. Philip was asked to acknowledge its arrival in Flanders, and to specify where two further versions, all but completed, should be sent (CSP, 1x, 400).°+ So he had already assumed a personal interest in Titian’s output at the age of twenty-one. Evidently it was also Philip—and not Charles, as has commonly been assumed—who initiated Titian’s second visit to Augsburg, for a letter sent to Mendoza from Augsburg

on September 12, 1550 shows the prince agitating about the apparent delay in Titian’s departure from Venice and voicing his concern that Titian should indeed make the journey (ibid., x,175). As regards Dolce’s reference to “the many works which Titian keeps sending,” the most important of the pictures dispatched to Philip between 1548 and 1557, the year of publication of the Dialogue, are those documented as follows: 1. Portraits of Philip himself: (a) that of 1548-1549 and two derivatives from it (see above). The matrix version here was perhaps the seated portrait now in the Cincinnati Art Museum (Tietze, pl. 214); the crown there would seem to be a later addition;® (b) a “retrato pequeno” sent to Philip in 1553.8 This phrase occurs in a letter of March the version painted for Granvella and were quite ha hecho y si ubiera mas tiemp yo se le hiciera distinct from it. For Granvella requested the latter tornar hazer.’’ And there are records of two subhimself and for himself, in his letter to Titian of stantial payments made by Philip to Titian while April 28, 1549 (Zarco del Valle, op.cit., 226f.). And the artist was at Augsburg in 1550-51 (Crowe and though Titian wrote back on July 6 saying that it Cavalcaselle, II, 504). It should be noted, however, would very soon be ready, it was not until October that the portrait of Philip which Queen Mary of 6 that he announced its completion, and it was not Hungary sent to Mary Tudor of England in 1553, actually sent off until March of the following year when Philip was paving the latter court, was evi-

(ibid,, 228-30). dently a different work from Prado No. 411. Since

83. I omit here the full-length portrait of Philip in the work in question belonged to Queen Mary and armor, Prado No. 411, because the evidence sug- was described as having been painted three years gests that, painted in Augsburg in 1550-51, it went earlier, Crowe and Cavalcaselle (II, 209) and others

directly to Queen Mary of Hungary. It is inven- after them naturally assumed that it was the

toried as being in the latter’s keeping in 1558 (A. Prado full-length. However, a letter of November Pinchart, ‘“Tableaux et sculptures de Marie d’Au- 21, 1553, from Francisco de Eraso to Philip detriche ... ,”’ Revue universelle des arts, 3, 1856, scribes the portrait sent to England as being ‘‘the 139, No. 3). So it has very reasonably been assumed one in the blue coat with the white wolf-skin” that, when Philip wrote to Queen Mary from Augs- (CSP, XI, 384). Among surviving portraits of

burg on May 16, 1551, saying that the Duke of Philip only Prado No. 452, which is commonly

Alba would bring her “‘los retratos de Ticiano, que considered to be an atelier version of a lost Titian, vuestra alteza me mandé que le embiase”’ (Beroqui, has a costume which fits this description. Perhaps, 116 n. 3), he was referring to this work. The sec- therefore, what Queen Mary actually sent was the

ond half of Philip’s sentence does indeed suggest lost matrix version from which this replica de-

that a portrait of himself was in question; ‘‘al tived; again I owe this observation to Gould,

myo armado se le parece bien la priesa con que le loc.cit.

254 Dolce’s “Aretino”’ and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento 24 from Vargas to Philip (Zarco del Valle, op.cit., p. 231). Titian himself, in a letter to Philip of March 23, announced that the work in question was being sent along. And a minute in Spanish of June 18 which goes with this letter of Titian’s records the portrait’s arrival (Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1, 505f.8*). Beroqui has suggested that it was Prado No. 452, an atelier version of a lost original.® 2. A batch of works sent to Philip in 1552. Vargas reported to Philip in a letter of June 3 that year that Titian had delivered two pictures to him, and that he in turn had

handed them over to the Bishop of Segovia, who would convey them to the prince (Beroqui, p. 129 n. 1). A letter from Titian to Philip of October 11 discloses their sub-

ject matter: one was a “landscape,” the other a “portrait of St. Margaret.” More recently, according to the same letter, it had become possible for Titian to send Philip a “Queen of Persia’; so he had now arranged its dispatch, as a supplement to the other two canvases (Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1, 505). In his reply to Titian of December 12 Philip reported that the paintings entrusted to the Bishop had duly been delivered, but that the Queen had not yet arrived (Zarco del Valle, loc.cit.). There is no document to show that it ever materialized thereafter. The “landscape” may perhaps have been the Louvre Venus del Pardo. In 1574 Titian

listed this, among paintings that had gone to Philip, as “la nuda con il paese con el satiro” (Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1, 540), and variations of style within the canvas sug-

gest that it was first laid out and worked on some thirty years earlier, but added to around this date.®® Junquera has identified the “portrait of St. Margaret” as being the painting of that saint now in the Escurial Monastery.®” As for the “Queen of Persia’”’— presumably one of Titian’s fancy portraits—this is lost without trace. 3. The sequence of poesie. The earliest known use of the term poesie occurs in the March 1553 letter from Titian to Philip already cited above. Titian’s words in this con-

nection show that the sequence was promised to Philip and under way by this date. The same may already have been true nine months earlier. For Vargas reported to Philip, in his June 1552 letter also cited above, that Titian was working on two further pictures, and it seems highly likely that he was referring here to two of the poesie. This, then, makes it probable that the sequence was first planned and discussed when Titian was at Augsburg in 1550-1551.°8 84. The minute itself was published in a more correct 89. The batch may well have included one or more

version by Beroqui, 119 n. 1. further portraits of Philip. And in that case the

85. Ibid., 118f. Crowe and Cavalcaselle (II, 210) sug- Naples version of Prado No. 411 would be a disgested that the portrait sent to Spain in 1553 was tinct possibility; for there is no specific evidence

the version of Prado No. 411 which is now in that Philip had received it at an earlier date (cf. Naples. But the term pequefio in the letter subse- above, note 83). The likelihood that this version guently published by Zarco del Valle shows that formed part of the Farnese collection (A. de Rinalthis cannot be right, as Beroqui pointed out. For dis, Pinacoteca del Museo Nazionale di Napoli,

Prado No. 452, see also note 83 above. Naples, 1928, 337) does not rule out earlier owner-

86. I follow here the observations of Gould, loc.ctt. ship by Philip himself. 87. M. Junquera, ‘’La Santa Margherita di Tiziano en Philip’s role in the direction of Titian’s output el Escorial,’” Archivio Espanol de Arte, 24, 1951, was not, it is worth adding, limited in the period

67 ff. under scrutiny here to the pictures which he ordered

88. As suggested by C. Gould, ‘The Perseus and An- for himself. He also appears to have been more dromeda and Titian’s Poesie,’’ BurlM, 105, 1963, or less responsible for several of Queen Mary of

114. Hungary’s acquisitions. For the portrait which he

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 255 It comprised (up to 1557) the following pictures: (a) The Danae was evidently the first to go to Philip. For retrospective references to it in two letters of Titian’s which are undated, but can be assigned to the late summer of 1554, place its dispatch some time during the preceding months (G. Bottari and S. Ticozzi, Raccolta di lettere ..., Milan, 1822-1825, u, 25f., 27f.). (b) The Venus and Adonis was sent off in September 1554 (ibid., u, 26f£.). For a more full account of the documents relating to it, see C, p. 55. (c) The Medea and Jason was promised for the future in the second of the two undated letters of Titian’s which have just been cited. The work is lost without trace. (d) The

Perseus and Andromeda was also promised in the same letter. It probably reached Philip, along with the Medea and Jason, in September 1556; for the evidence which suggests this, see again C, p. 55. 4. Other portraits. According to a letter which Philip wrote to Vargas on September

7, 1556, a batch of portraits by Titian had just been delivered to him in Ghent (CSP, xl, 275). They are unnamed in this letter, and there is no other clue to their identity.®? Aretino had written a letter to Philip in December 1553 which opens with praise for Titian (Camesasca, dclxix). Aenea Vico Parmigiano

This celebrated engraver lived from 1523 to 1567, and his works carry dates ranging from 1541 to 1560.°° He was a correspondent of Aretino’s in the late 1540’s (Camesasca, cecxi, cdxxvi, cdxxxiii), and the latter had a very high opinion of his work. Writing to Francesco Salviati in August 1545, he ranked Vico even higher than Marcantonio Raimondi (ibid., ccxlvii). Then in September 1550, on the eve of Vico’s departure for the Imperial court, he wrote a letter of recommendation to Granvella and gave this to the engraver to take with him; the recommendation, which is itself extant, spoke of how excellently Vico would perform in portraying the Emperor (ibid., dlxvi, dlxxix). It was in fact on his arrival at the court, at the end of the same year, that Vico did the engraving of the Emperor’s features to which Dolce refers. This print is dated 1550;®! Doni gives a description of it in his La Zucca (Venice, 1565 ed., pp. 191ff.). Vasari’s 1550 edition had contained only the briefest allusion to Vico (Ricci, 1v, 309) —whereas that of 1568 would give many details of his work (Milanesi, vu, 427ff.). In sent to her in 1551, see above, note 83. There is also is to be so he may begin it.’”’ The “picture of Our suggestive evidence in the case of two other paint- Lady”’ seems likely to be the Vergine Addolorata

ings which in due course would pass to the Queen (the one on marble, now Prado No. 444) which in Flanders. Vargas’ letter to Philip of June 3, was eventually dispatched ta Queen Mary, along 1552 has the following postscript (CSP, X, 530; with the Trinity, in October 1554 (see C, p. 55). And omitted by Beroqui, 129 n. 1): ‘Titian has prom- that of ‘Our Lord’’ must be the Christ Appearing ised to finish the picture of the Trinity by Septem- to the Magdalene, which probably went to the ber, and waits the measurements the one of Our Queen in the very same consignment (Crowe and Lord is to have, in order that he may begin it.’ Cavaleaselle, II, 232f.). It is also interesting to And Philip’s letter to Titian of December 12 that observe, in both of these passages, Philip’s peryear has the following marginal note appended to sonal concern that the Trinity should be hurried

it (CSP, X, 605; omitted by Zarco del Valle, op.cit., up for the Emperor. : the Trinity by the end of September, and he de- gt. Seo A Bartech Le oe 28k ,

231): ‘‘Titian has promised to finish the picture of go. Thieme-Becker, XXX 328

sires to be told what size the picture of Our Lady 21. XV 339£ 70S pemire graveur, Vienna, 1803-

256 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

1557, the very year of the Dialogue’s publication, Vico was in Venice.®? It seems likely, therefore, that Dolce was compensating here for what was regarded in Venice as an in-

sufficient tribute to Vico in Vasari’s first edition. A personal link between Dolce and Vico may be implied by the fact that Vico’s Discorso sopra le medaglie degli antichi was brought out in Venice by Giolito in 1555 and included two sonnets of Dolce’s, addressed to Cosimo de’ Medici.% PAGE FOURTEEN

“The Emperor Nero ... practiced painting, and personally made terra-cotta bas-reliefs of great beauty” Suetonius, cited by Dolce as his source, actually says succinctly: Habuit et pingendi fingendique non mediocre studium (Nero, 52). Compare also Tacitus, Annals, 1. 13, 3. “Julius Caesar too used to be very fond of paintings and intaglios” Probably from Suetonius, Divus Julius, 47: Gemmas, toreumata, signa, tabulas operis antiqui animosissime comparasse.

“The Emperor Hadrian ...[sc. was a devotee of painting]” Three different ancient authorities record that Hadrian was a practicing artist, and their statements on the subject were all known and in print in Dolce’s day. Dio Cassius, writing in Greek, says that the Emperor made statues and designs (LxIx, 3, 2). The passage in question, though it has not survived textually, is known from its citation in the Suidas-Lexicon (ed. A. Adler, Leipzig, 1928-1938, 1, 54, entry for Hadrian). The editio princeps of this lexicon came out in 1499; Aldus issued a Venetian edition in 1514. Compare also LxIx, 4, which indirectly indicates Hadrian’s interest in architecture. Again,

the life of Hadrian by “Aelius Spartianus” contained in the compilation known as the Scriptores Historiae Augustae describes the Emperor as being picturae peritissimus (14, 8). The editio princeps of the Scriptores came out in 1475. Lastly, the Epitome of the De Caesaribus by Aurelius Victor states that Hadrian was pictor fictorque ex aere (14, 2). This text was first published in 1504, under the title, De Vita et Moribus Imperatorum

Romanorum libellus excerptus, and there were many further editions in the first half of the sixteenth century.” The passage in question had also been borrowed for the Life of Hadrian in the Historia Miscella of Landolphus Sagax (x, 9)—by way of expanding the basic text provided by Paulus Diaconus; and this Historia was published for the first time in 1531-1532.

92. Ibid., XV, 342. 93. See Cicogna, 163. g4. BMC, s. v. Suidas.

95. Ibid., s. v. Aurelius Victor, Sextus.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 257 These details of transmission and publication are relevant, simply because neither Alberti, Pino, Castiglione nor Vasari, in citing comparable examples of famous men of antiquity who were artists or interested in art, mentions Hadrian. Nor does any other Renaissance art theorist known to me who wrote before 1557, with the single exception of Francisco de Hollanda (see below). Two separate points emerge from this. First, there is Dolce’s phrase diletossene etian-

dio, which refers back to the close of the immediately preceding speech. There Fabrini had cited Nero’s making of reliefs and Julius Caesar’s general enthusiasm for art. The

phrase, then—vague as it is—could denote interest in art rather than actual artistic practice. But the classical sources cited above show unequivocally that Dolce must have had practice in mind. And the same applies to Severus, whom Dolce links with Hadrian in this sentence; see the next section of the Commentary. Aurelius Victor’s actual text

does in fact say more generally—in contrast to the Epitome—that Hadrian curare... tabulas pictas (14, 4); but this was not published until 1579.°° There is also the question of Dolce’s source here. As already mentioned, Francisco de

Hollanda, in his Tragado da pintura antigua of 1548, had cited Hadrian’s skill as a painter; and he had actually named, as authorities on this subject, both Dio Cassius and Spartianus (tr. A. Bell, Oxford, 1928, p. 23). There is, however, nothing else in the rest

of the Dialogue to suggest that Dolce had read the Tragado or that he used it as a source; and there is no particular need to assume that he drew on de Hollanda here. A much more likely source can be proposed. Aldus had issued in Venice in 1516, and again in 1519, a compilation which included both Dio Cassius on the Roman emperors and the Scriptores Historiae Augustae.®" Dolce, who knew no Greek, could have found there both Dio Cassius’ description of Hadrian as a practicing artist, in a Latin paraphrase by G. Merula, Nam pinxit venustissime atque etiam effigies et cera et creta formavit (p. 14r), and the comparable passage in Aelius Spartianus (p. 28v). So he may well have acquired in this way—either directly, or through the Venetian literary grapevine—a knowledge of the same two antique sources as were cited by Francisco de Hollanda. “Alexander Severus, the son of Mammea” That is, the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. The sole classical source for his interest in art

is the Scriptores Historiae Augustae. Aelius Lampridius says of Severus there that he

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., s. v. Dion Cassius: Neroae et Trajant atque

Adriani Caesarunt Vitae... , etc.

258 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

pinxit mire (27, 7). In the edition of the Scriptores which came out in Venice in 1516 (see above), this passage appears at p. 127v. In contrast, however, to the case of Hadrian, Alberti had named Severus as a practicing artist in his Della pittura (ed. L. Mallé, Florence, 1950, p. 79); so had Pino (ed. Palluchini, p. 91). “In one case Tiberius paid sixty sesterces”’ See Pliny, Hist. Nat. 35. 70: [Parrhasius] pinxit et archigallum, quam picturam amavit

Tiberius princeps atque, ut auctor est Deculos, HS [LX] aestimatam cubicolo suo inclusit.

All fifteenth and sixteenth century translations of Pliny into Italian which I have examined give the price paid by Tiberius as sessanta sestertii, sixty sesterces. Indeed, they all appear to have followed in this respect the archetypal edition of 1476 by Cristoforo Landino; and this, since it came out in Venice, was probably the version of Pliny which Dolce himself used. Yet six million would appear to be the right figure, according to the translation by Jex-Blake and Sellers.°° It would seem that faulty manuscript trans-

mission caused error here early on, since the text printed by these same editors and reproduced above has the figure LX, ie., sixty thousand, in brackets.°® Dolce’s own phrase, una sessanta sestertii, is a little odd. But the conversion into equivalent weight which he offers alongside makes it plain he was in fact giving the same price as Landino.}°°

“King Attalus bought a panel from Aristides of Thebes for a hundred talents”

Pliny offers at two different points the bare statement that a painting by Aristides was sold to King Attalus for a hundred talents (op.cit., 35. 100; see also 7. 126), and this exactly matches what Dolce says here. One should also note, however, another passage concerning this artist (ibid., 35. 24). Pliny relates there how, in the course of an auction, Attalus bid six hundred thousand denarii for a picture of Dionysus by Aristides: Mummius, he says, then withdrew the work. It is probable, though not certain, that the same painting was in question here. Vasari, in any event, drew on the auction

story in his 1550 edition (Ricci, 1, 115). Hence the discrepancy between the sum of money which he names and the one offered by Dolce. Dolce’s conversion figure is, in this case, reasonably in accord with Pliny’s text.

99. Ibid., 114. 174.

98. The Elder Pliny’s Chapters ..., 115. to1. K. Clark, Leonardo da Vinci, Cambridge, 1952,

400. One lb. equals 1 as, 1 sestertius equals 21/2 asses; 102. Ibid., 178.

so 150 lbs. equals 60 sesterces. 103. Documents of May 27 and July 10, 1543 show that

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 259 “Zeuxis... gave [his work] away” From Pliny, op.cit., 35. 62: Postea [Zeuxis] donare opera sua instituit, quod nullo pretio satis digno permutari posse diceret.

“ “TF only there were patrons like Maecenas...” From Martial, Epigrammata, 8. 56, 5: Sint Maecenates non deerunt, Flacce, Marones. “Leonardo da Vinci was granted abundant bounties and vast honors by Philip, Duke of Milan” An error on Dolce’s part: it was not Philip who lavished honors on Leonardo, but rather Lodovico il Moro, usurper of the dukedom.?1 “Also by... King Francis the First of France, in whose arms he died at a great age” Here Dolce drew on Vasari’s 1550 edition (Ricci, m1, 23f.) and in doing so took over

a story which was legend, not historical fact. Leonardo indeed went to France as the King’s painter in 1516; but he actually died in the Castle of Cloux, near Amboise, while the court was at St.-Germain-en-Laye.!”

“Raphael was taken up by Pope Julius the Second, and subsequently by Pope Leo the Tenth” Dolce’s source here was evidently Vasari’s 1550 Vita of Raphael. Raphael’s relations with the two Popes had been set out in detail there (Ricci, m1, 88ff., 1o00ff.).

“Michelangelo [was taken up] by both these pontiffs, and also by Pope Paul the Third’ Again Vasari was Dolce’s source (Ricci, Iv, 402ff., 415f., 424, etc.). He may very well also have known Condivi’s 1553 Vita of Michelangelo, which offered a much expanded account of the relationship with Paul III (ed. A. Maraini, Florence, 1927, pp. 72ff.).

“Titian... twas in Rome painting [Paul the Third’s] portrait’ Titian reached Rome in October 1545 (see Camesasca, cclvii, cclxiv). Vasari had mentioned this visit in his 1550 Vita of Perino del Vaga (Ricci, tv, 386). There, however, he had erroneously placed Titian’s arrival under the year 1546, and the only portrait of Paul HI which he had referred to in this connection had been an earlier one, painted “quando sua Santita ando a Busse’’—that is, in 1543.19? So there is no reason to take this 1550 passage of his into account in assessing what Dolce says about the Roman visit.

Titian was paid for a portrait of the Pope and for of Titian himself (Crowe and Cavalcaselle, II,

his return to Venice (Venturi, IX, 3, 145), and Are- Soff.) suggests that the sitting took place in Emilia tino refers to this portrait in letters of July 1543 —thereby confirming the implication of this 1550 and June 1544 (Camesasca, clxxi, clxxxi). Compari- statement of Vasari’s. son of Paul III’s movements at the time with those

260 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

Aretino, in a letter of November 1549, had praised a portrait of Paul III which Titian had painted in Rome (Camesasca, dxli). But he had been no more specific about the character of the portrait than Dolce himself would be. So, when it comes to the question of which particular portrait Dolce was referring to, no help is available from this direction either. Only probability favors the unfinished portrait of Paul III with His Nepoti which is now in Naples (Tietze, pl. 170). This was certainly painted in Rome; for Vasari’s statement to this effect in his 1568 edition (Milanesi, vu, 446) is confirmed by the evident reflection in it of the family discords which were harassing the Pope at the time. Possible alternatives would be the following: (a) a portrait of the Pope alone. The version now in Leningrad has affinities with the family portrait which extend, beyond age and appearance, to the way in which the Pope is psychologically characterized. So it may represent a fresh version painted in Rome, rather than a secondary product of the 1543 sitting.?°> (b) a double portrait of Paul with his son Pier Luigi, recorded as being in the Farnese collection in 1680, but subsequently lost without trace (G. Campori, Raccolta di cataloghi ed inventarii ... , Modena, 1870, p. 237). This might have been painted in Rome; but it could also have been painted in Venice from separate, preexistent portraits of Paul on the one hand and Pier Luigi on the other.1°® There is no way of knowing. “That loveliest of nude figures [painted] for the Cardinal Farnese” That is, Titian’s Danae and Cupid, now in Naples (Tietze, pl. 173). According to Ridolfi (Von Hadeln, 1, 178) it was not the Cardinal Farnese who commissioned this work, but rather Count Ottavio Farnese.!°7 Since Vasari records that it was the Cardinal who

summoned Titian to Rome (Milanesi, vu, 446) it may be that Dolce, knowing this to have been the case, simply assumed that he ordered the Danae. Vasari confirms in his 1568 edition (ibid., vu, 447) that Michelangelo saw the Danae in Titian’s studio. But there are significant differences between the two accounts. Dolce speaks of many visits, and Vasari only of a single visit, with himself as Michelangelo’s companion. Dolce attributes pure meraviglia to Michelangelo; Vasari says that Michelangelo praised the work while they were in the studio, but criticized its lack of disegno

104. See on this subject Crowe and Cavalcaselle, I, in Leningrad (which came from the Casa Bar-

1236. barigo) may have been painted in Rome, see Pallu1. Vasa records Ct Ealuinal’ Santofoces Re aise Conta, "Titan's Portrat of Paul Ul,” GBA, 9,

mentions many copies, and states that a portrait 1946, 73ff.; S. Ortolani, ‘‘Restauro di un Tiziano,”

of Paul III belonged to the Duke of Urbino (Mila- BilA, 33, 1948, 44ff. . |

nesi, VII, 443f.). But his remarks on this subject It should be noted that Vasari’s story, in his are of small help when it comes to distinguishing letter to Benedetto Varchi of February 12, 1547 the various extant versions. For a fuller discussion (Milanesi, VII, 447 n. 5), of how a Titian of of these versions and the suggestion that the one

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 261 once they had left. There is a strong likelihood that Dolce was drawing, directly or indi rectly, on the testimony of Titian himself here, and it is on Vasari’s side that one finds an explanation for these discrepancies. They can be attributed to that anti-Venetian bias of Vasari’s which, engendered by the disappointment he had suffered in Venice in 15411542, comes to the fore very strongly in certain sections of his 1568 publication. Already in his 1550 Vita of Perino del Vaga he had made a point of denying that, when Titian came to Rome, it was his superior abilities which put fear into Perino’s heart (Ricci, tv, 386). The 1568 story can be regarded as a more pungent and weighty touch of the same essential kind. When the subject of Titian’s Roman visit came up afresh, that is, Vasari now offered an implicit correction of the claim which Dolce had published. He did this, moreover, in a very neat way; by citing himself as the one and only person who had had occasion to hear Michelangelo’s real opinion, he made it impossible for his testimony on this subject to be absolutely gainsaid.

“Titian was also sought after many times over by all the dukes and lords of both Italy and Germany” Titian’s aristocratic Italian patrons (in Rome, Mantua, Ferrara, etc.) are spoken of elsewhere in the Dialogue. For a list of some of his principal northern patrons (in particular the Hapsburg dynasty and members of its various courts), see the one provided by Vasari in his 1568 edition (Milanesi, vir, 460). PAGE FIFTEEN

“The Greeks, recognizing the greatness of painting, forbade slaves to practice it”

See Pliny, Hist. Nat. 35. 77: Huius [sc. Pamphili] auctoritate effectum est Sicyone primum, deinde et in tota Graecia, ut pueri omnia ante graphicen, hoc est picturam in buxo, docerentur recipereturque ars ea in primum gradum liberalium. Semper quidem honos ei fuit ut ingenui eam exercerent, mox ut honesti, perpetuo interdicto ne servitia docerentur.

“Aristotle distinguished it from the mechanical arts ...” etc.

See Politics 8. 2, 3 and 6. 3, 2. Italian translations of this treatise had appeared in 1547, 1549 and 1551.

Paul III had been exposed on one of the Vatican 107. Ridolfi goes on to record that Titian did a Venus

terraces so that the varnish could dry and the and Adonis for Ottavio (Von Hadeln, I, 179). But passers-by had doffed their hats to it, may well this, as C. Gould has recently noted (BurlM, 105, refer to the 1543 portrait, rather than, as Milanesi 1963, 114 n. 7), probably represents an incorrect

assumed, the family portrait. deduction from the existence of such a painting in

106. See Crowe and Cavalcaselle, II, 85, and also 116, the Palazzo Farnese in Ridolfi’s day; the latter where their earlier remarks on this subject seem work is lost, but an engraving of it shows that it to be contradicted; in any case they effectively corresponded in type to replicas which long post-

mention both of the twin possibilities. date the Prado Venus.

262 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

“Numerous Popes in Sacred Councils approved [the public use of images]” This comment seems to reflect the tenor of contemporary religious discussion. Among a number of texts which indicate that the subject adumbrated here—the Church’s attitude toward art—inspired a rising tide of debate in the latter half of the sixteenth century, Giulio da Fabriano’s Due dialoghi of 1564 are especially notable.1°* Dolce’s strictures on the Last Judgment of Michelangelo (page 40) actually compare rather closely with those of Giulio, who used a similar criterion of convenevolezza.}"®

“Tmages are... the books of the ignorant’ Pope Gregory’s famous dictum to this effect was evidently revived in the sixteenth century.

“Julius Caesar wept on seeing a statue of Alexander the Great in Spain...” The story is taken from Suetonius (Divus Julius 7): Quaestori ulterior Hispania obvenit; ubi cum mandatu praetoris iure dicundo conventus circumiret Gadisque venisset, animadversa apud Herculis templum Magni Alexandri imagine ingemuit et quasi pertaesus ignaviam suam, quod nihil dum ad se memorabile actum esset in aetate, qua jam Alexander orbem terrarum subegisset.... “Sallust records that Quintus Fabius and Publius Scipio used to say...,” etc. From Sallust’s Bellum Jugurthinum, iv, 5-6: Nam saepe ego audivi Q. Maximum, P. Scipionem, praeterea civitatis nostrae praeclaros viros, solitos ita dicere, cum niaiorum imagines intuerentur, vehementissime sibi animum ad virtutem accendi. Scilicet non ceram illam neque figuram tantam vim in sese habere, sed memoria rerum gestarum eam flammam egregiis viris in pectore crescere neque prius sedari, quam virtus eorum famam atque gloriam adaequaverit. Dolce gives almost a word-for-word translation.

“This art also does service to princes and captains...” Compare Castiglione, I] Cortegiano, 1, xlix: “Si traggon molte utilita, e massimamente nella guerra, per disegnar paesi, siti, fiumi, ponti, rocche, fortezze, e tai cose.” PAGE SIXTEEN

“TJewelry and gold] are prized the more if their makeup includes some engraving...” For this depreciation of gold, compare Alberti, Della pittura, ed. Malle, p. 76 and Pino, ed. Palluchini, p. 86; also page 25 of the Dialogue, where the use of gold paint is criticized, as by Alberti.

108. See Blunt, Artistic Theory, ch. viii. tog. Ibid., 112-13; see also Lee, 231ff.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 263 “Castiglione in one extremely beautiful Latin elegy...”

The lines referred to—which appear under a heading explaining that Castiglione imagines that his wife, left behind in Mantua, is writing to him in Rome—are as follows: Sola tuos vultus referens Raphaelis imago picta manu curas allevat usque meas. Huic ego delicias facio, arrideoque, jocorque; Alloquor, et tamquam reddere verba queat. Assensu nutugue, mihi saepe illa videtur Dicere velle aliquid, et tua verba loqui. Agnoscit, balboque patrem puer ore salutat; Hoc solor, longos decipioque dies.

Dolce refers explicitly in what follows to the seventh line. The elegy first appeared in print, so far as J have been able to trace, only in 1558 (see Olympia Fulvia Morata, Latina et Graeca... Monumenta, Basel, 1558, in which it figures as Hippolitae Taurellae ... Epistola ad maritum suum Balthasarem Castilionem). Dolce also tenders the information that the Raphael referred to in the elegy was “‘currently in Mantua.” This statement of his and the elegy itself have both been connected

with the portrait in the Louvre, which is probably the one referred to in a letter of Bembo’s from April 1516 (Golzio, pp. 42f.).11° It seems reasonable to take Dolce’s refer-

ence as indeed attesting that the Louvre portrait was in Mantua in the mid-sixteenth century, for the following reasons: (a) Rubens copied this portrait and we know that he copied other works in Mantua during his stay in Italy. (b) There is a reference from early in the seventeenth century to the preservation of a full-scale portrait by Raphael in the house of Castiglione at Mantua (A. B. Negrini, Elogi historici di alcuni personaggi della famiglia Castiglione, Mantua, 1606, p. 432).111 (c) Although there is no reference to the portrait in Vasari’s 1550 edition, which was patently the source for all the other

information about Raphael that Dolce offers in his Dialogue, the fact that Dolce had been in Mantua in 1543'** provides a likely explanation for his extra knowledge in this instance.

The only reason for not regarding this triple connection as absolutely certain is that the 1606 source just cited also mentions a miniature portrait attributed to Raphael. Since a portrait of the latter kind would have been an eminently suitable keepsake for a man

110. Since the Louvre portrait is datable on stylistic 112. See Cicogna, 125: the dedicatory letter which pref-

grounds ca. 1515, it cannot be the portrait of Cas- aces Dolce’s translation of Sabellico’s Latin histiglione that Raphael was apparently engaged in tory of Venice was written from Mantua in the

painting in September 1519 (Golzio, 97). year preceding the book’s publication.

111. I am indebted to J. Shearman for this reference.

264 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinguecento

to leave with his wife, it is possible that both Castiglione and Dolce were referring to this miniature. Probability, however, still favors the Louvre portrait. “Beauty and charm” It is at this point in the Dialogue that the key terms vaghezza (two speeches earlier), bellezza and grazia are introduced for the first time. “The frescoing of the apartments in the Papal Palace’ Obviously Dolce was referring here to the Stanza della Segnatura (1509-1511), the Stanza dell’ Eliodoro (1511-1514) and the Stanza dell’ Incendio (1514-1517). Vasari had described in his 1550 edition how Pope Julius II had commissioned Raphael to fresco the first of these rooms (in 1509), and the artist had, at his behest, gone on to work in

the second; how Leo X, on his succession, had desired that Raphael should continue frescoing this second room; and lastly how, still under Leo X, Raphael had in due course completed the third stanza (Ricci, m1, 90, 94, 97ff., 100, 107ff.). It is possible that Dolce also had in mind the Sala dei Palafrenieri (probably frescoed in 1517; see Golzio, p. 56), the Sala di Constantino (1520-1524; ibid., pp. 120ff., 151) and even the Logge (completed by May 15109; ibid., p. 98). For although these rooms were, in execution, entirely the work of Raphael’s following, and the Sala di Constantino was only frescoed after Raphael’s death, Vasari had in each case written of how Leo X had given the commission to Raphael himself (Ricci, m1, 110f., 114, 174; Iv, 355). “The Sistine Chapel and the Pauline Chapel” For the Cappella Sistina Michelangelo frescoed the ceiling (1508-1512) and much

later the Last Judgment (1536-1541); for the Cappella Paolina he did frescoes of the Conversion of Saul (1542-1545) and the Martyrdom of St. Peter (1546-1550). Vasari in his 1550 Vita of Michelangelo had described how Julius II had commissioned the first of these projects; how the second, begun in the shape of drawings under Clement VII, was later continued by order of Paul IIJ; and lastly how it was Paul III once more who had given Michelangelo the third Vatican commission (Ricci, Iv, 405, 424, 429). PAGE SEVENTEEN

“This illustrious Government of ours had the Sala del Gran Consiglio painted by various artists... . Subsequently it called on Titian to do two canvases there...”

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 265 Both of the groups of works cited here were to be destroyed by fire in 1577. The first commission referred to is the one given by the Signoria to the Bellini and their associates (the Vivarini, probably Carpaccio) in the 1470’s.11% Our fullest information about the resultant cycle of canvases, designed to illustrate memorable events in the early history of Venice, comes from Sansovino. He, in his Venetia citta nobilissima (1581 ed., pp. 123ff.), describes it as it stood between 1564 and 1577. It then comprised twenty-two canvases in all, and he provides a number of attributions. But it remains impossible to say with certainty, on the basis of his account, either how many subjects were originally meant to be included in the cycle, or how many had been completed by the time of Giovanni Bellini’s death (cf. here C, p. 21). Vasari’s account in his 1550 edition (Ricci, mu, 159f.) mentions only three canvases, all given to Giovanni Bellini. In his 1568 edition (Milanesi, m1, 155ff.) he attributes four to Giovanni Bellini, five to Gentile and two to Vivarini; but he is not necessarily fully reliable here. The second commission is a more complicated affair to relate. On May 31, 1513 Titian petitioned the Council of Ten to grant him the order for painting a battle piece in the Sala, and he obtained the commission in June (G. Lorenzi, Monumenti per servire alla Storia del Palazzo Ducale, Venice, 1869, docs. 337-38). In March 1514 the agreement was suspended, but in November the concession was renewed (ibid., docs. 341, 344-45). Then in 1516 Titian obtained the broker’s license vacant on the death of Giovanni Bellini—on condition that he execute the same battle piece, which he had evidently not yet begun or only barely begun (ibid., doc. 356). Presumably the Battle was the canvas on which Titian was at work in November 1537 (see the letter of Aretino’s dated November 9, Camesasca, xlviii), following a review of the contractual situation by the authorities on June 23 (Lorenzi, op.cit., doc. 462), and the one which was ready in August 1538 (A. Luzio, “Altre spigolature tizianesche,” Archivio storico dell’arte, 1, 1890, 209). Although, that is, the documents just cited offer no title for the canvas in progress at this time, it is unlikely to have been the Homage for reasons given below.!!* Probably the original intention was that Titian should paint the Guariento subject of the Battle of Spoleto, but the Doge Gritti subsequently changed the interpretation, so that the subject became the Battle of Cadore.4!° The work can be reconstructed from the following reproductions: an engraving by Fontana of 1569; an anonymous engraving in the Alber-

tina; a copy in oils in the Uffizi; and a copy of the figure of a girl in the Accademia Carrara at Bergamo. Two drawings connected with the project survive: a compositional

113. For the only available documentation on this sub- ever, E. Tietze-Conrat, ‘‘Titian’s Battle of Caject, see Von Hadeln, I, 56 n. 2 and 67 n. 3. dore,’” AB, 27, 1045, 205-8, where it is suggested 114. For this analysis of the documents, see ibid., I, that the subject was never anything but the Battle

165 n. 2 and cf. Venturi, IX, 3, 99-103. of Speleta.

115. See Crowe and Cavalcasclle, II, 7; compare, how-

266 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

sketch in charcoal in the Louvre, and a charcoal drawing in the Uffizi for the horseman on the right of the bridge.**®

The second of the “two canvases” cited by Dolce was Titian’s Homage of Federico Barbarossa before the Pope. This work does not receive certain mention in the literature before 1537, when a document of November 30 refers to two works for the Sala (Italianischen Forschungen, Iv, 4, 1911, p. 134). None the less it was probably the first to be completed, for Vasari places his account of it next door to his account of Titian’s work on the Padua frescoes (Milanesi, vir, 432). Similarly Sansovino expressly states that it was Titian’s first canvas for the Sala (op.cit., p. 129v) and Ridolfi links Titian’s undertaking of it with the death of Giorgione (Von Hadeln, 1, 157). In that case the Homage would seem identifiable with the work that Titian, after an express remonstrance from the Signoria of August 11, 1522, was engaged on in October of that year (letter of October 14 from Tebaldi to Alfonso d’Este; Venturi, Storia, 1x, 3, p. 118)—even though the document of November 1537 might seem to imply that the canvas was still not absolutely finished fifteen years later.4!7 See also C, p. 20, where the Homage is specifically mentioned.

“The Government gave Giorgione of Castelfranco the task of painting the exterior of the Fondaco de’ Tedeschi...” The Fondaco Tedesco on the Rialto, kept open by the Venetian Republic so that visiting German merchants could lodge there, was rebuilt after being gutted by fire in January 1505. The roof was placed on the new building—completed only twelve months later—in May 1507 (M. Sanudo, Diarii, entry for May 15). Soon after the Signoria must have commissioned the frescoing of the exterior, for on November 8, 1508, the frescoes on the canal side were already completed and ready to be valued by a special committee of artists (L. Justi, Giorgione, Berlin, 1908, 1, 10f., docs. 4—-5).*"° For the fuller account which Dolce promises, see TC, p. 52. According to the evidence

discussed there, his statement that the canal side of the fagade was allocated to Giorgione and the street side to Titian correctly describes the way in which the decoration was split up between the two artists. Dolce’s remark that Titian “alhora era giovanetto” would seem to imply that Titian was not employed as an independent master at the time, but rather as an assistant working under Giorgione’s general supervision, and this implication is perhaps confirmed by the fact that Titian’s name does not figure in the

116. See E. Tietze-Conrat, “’Zu Tizians Schlacht von Cadore,” Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft fiir vervielfaltigende Kunst, 48, 1925, 42. z17. Cf. Von Hadeln, I, 157 n. 3. 118. Cf. Crowe and Cavalcaselle, II, 83-85.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 267 1508 valuation. This valuation, however, concerned only the frescoes on the canal side. It is therefore impossible actually to disprove Dolce’s contention that Titian’s portion

of the facade was allocated to him in person by the Signoria. One can say, however, that this is unlikely to have been the case, and explain the contention away by suggesting that it sprang from Dolce’s evident desire to concoct a purely fictitious rivalry between the two artists; compare the tale of chagrin on Giorgione’s part, surely legendary, at page 52. “Invention, design and coloring”

Pino had broken painting down into the same three components (ed. Palluchini, p. 100). Both he and Dolce drew on the antique division of rhetoric into three parts: inventio, or the choice of material; dispositio, or the preliminary blocking out of the discourse in terms of structural outlines and the relation of the parts to the whole; and elocutio, or the final rendition in language. Besides being set out in the ancient texts themselves, this triple scheme had been used in Daniello’s La Poetica, published in Venice in 1536 (1546 ed., p. 26). The first Renaissance theorist to formulate such a scheme for painting on the antique model had been Alberti. But the three components which he had singled out—circonscriptione, compositione and receptione di luni (ed. Malle, pp. 81f.)—accorded with the basic mechanics of pictorial execution; literary theory was not yet involved.*??

Dolce’s scheme may also have been shaped by his own antecedent theory of poetry.

In his Osservationi, first issued in 1550, he had written: “Ha ella [sc. the faculty of writing poetry] mestiero di inventione, di ordine, d’artificio e di parole” and again, “‘] versi e le parole sono il pennello, & i colori del Poeta, con che egli va operando & dipingendo la tavola della sua inventione” (1554 ed., pp. 183f.). The metaphor of painting

in the second of these passages is certainly interesting, and it may well be that he thought of a parallelism between versi in poetry, the structural element, and disegno in painting, and likewise between parole and colore. In that case an imprecision in the first passage cited would help to explain an anomaly later in the Dialogue: just as Dolce had left open, in the case of poetry, whether ordine and artificio were elements of invention or structure, so he would be loose and even evasive when it came to specifying how exactly ordine and varieta, a close equivalent of artificio, fitted into his scheme for painting (cf. Commentary below).

119. For a full comparison of Alberti’s scheme with those of Pino and Dolce, see Lee, Apx. 2, and C. Gilbert, “‘Alberti and Pino: Antique Frameworks for Classical Art Theory,’’ Marsyas, 3, 1946, 87ff.

268 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

“The invention is the fable or history...” Dolce’s definition of inventio is something of a patchwork affair. For this very reason the various sources which contributed to it can quite readily be detected. And his actual handling of these sources throws light, in turn, on his whole quality of mind.

1. As a starting point, we may say that Dolce—in line with his special literaryhumanistic interests—ties inventio in with everything which takes place before the artist begins on the actual execution of a painting.!”° He ties it in, that is, with the artist’s mental survey of the reading from which his subject matter is drawn, with suggestions arising from the discussion of this reading with learned humanist associates, and finally with the preliminary and purely mental “blocking out” of the way the figures will be disposed. This notion of a series of linked but mutually distinct processes, of which inventio is the first, followed by disegno and finally by colore, represents of course an attempt at an all-encompassing and logically consistent parallelism to the system of rhetoric which was discussed above. At the same time, however, Dolce’s main structure is, in part at least, semi-Albertian, in that his alignment of disegno and colore as mutually distinct and chronologically ordered aspects of the process of actual execution follows the practical recommendation of Alberti that the total outline be laid in before color is added (ed. Mallé, pp. 98f.). 2. With this aspect of Dolce’s definition another contributory aspect needs to be reconciled: namely the signs of some direct relation between it and the summary account of the connotations of inventio given by Vasari in the proemio to Part 1 of his 1550 edition, viz. (Ricci, 1, 73), ““Fa mettere insieme in istoria le figure a quattro a sei, a dieci, aventi....’” Both accounts lay a strong stress on narrative incident. And again, whereas Alberti relates inventio as a general term only to separate single elements within a work (so that, with him, a good inventio is the endowment of one figure with, say, an effective pose, expression or gesture), Vasari and Dolce relate the term to a compositional layout envisaged in its entirety, with the main emphasis resting therein on the figure group or groups that are of primary narrative importance. 3. On the other hand, Dolce stands apart from Vasari (as his literary preoccupations again make natural) in his implication that once an artist’s inventio, on the basis of reading and discussion, has been “blocked out” as a suitable and coherent choice of material, all that then remains is for the artist to transfer the substantive elements of this choice of material into pictorial form, with, as it were, a one-for-one correspondence be-

120. Cf. here Lee, 264-65.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 269 tween pictorial element and preconstituted literary element. “La inventione é la favola, o historia,” Dolce says, as if content were narrowly equivalent to the sum of the narrative elements worked in. Here Dolce’s literal-minded adhesion to the sense given to inventio in rhetorical theory, coupled with his philosophical ineptitude, stands in the way of his reproducing the philosophical implications of related Vasarian formulations. With Vasari, following out the Aristotelian concept of potentiality (itself understood in a rather narrow sense by the Renaissance), the artist develops and brings to realization the inherent potential of such a subject as stands available to him—see, for example, his account of sculptural creation (Ricci, 1, 52). This kind of a conceptual formula offers the notion of a “gap,” to be bridged by the ingegno of each individual artist, between the state in which a subject exists only as such, and the state of its realization in pic-

torial form; but hardly the smallest glimmer of all this can be detected in or behind what Dolce says. Compare here the extended account of inventio given later, T, p. 23: ‘““... appare, che la inventione vien da due parti, dalla historia, e dall’ingegno del Pittore. Dalla historia egli ha semplicemente la materia. E. dall’ingegno oltre all’ordine e la convenevolezza, procedono I’attitudini, la varieta, e la (per cosi dire) energia delle figure, ma questa e parte comune col disegno.” The phrase “semplicemente la materia” promises well here, at first glance, for a concept of “potentiality.” Basically, however, materia is for Dolce a literary term, used with a sense taken over from Cicero, and not a philosophical one. In the same way, too, ingegno can be seen on analysis to have the sense of a term pertaining to literary-humanistic discrimination, rather than to what we might call powers of creative realization. Lastly, it becomes clear even to Dolce, as he tacks on extra elements under the general heading of inventio, that these elements entail some degree of overlap with the, for him, distinct field of disegno; in effect, that is, his sub-

categories shade off by degrees into what comes under the heading of inventio, in its Albertian sense and usage. In sum, then, we can say that Dolce starts out with a literary-humanistic sense of the term inventio that is quite sixteenth century in its essence; but that, partly because, with inadequate philosophical foundations, he attempts to interweave elements of Vasarian thought, and partly because he cannot depart one jot from the initial premise of a strict boundary-line between literary discrimination and technical competence, he progresses in his elucidation of the same term back toward a practical-empirical fifteenth century framework of thought, in which his conceptual starting point actually has no proper place.

270 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

4. It is tempting to look in Dolce, within this whole context, for some apprehension of the relationship between Titian and Aretino, as artist and “impresario” enjoying a collaboration of a distinctive kind. The main features of this collaboration seem to have been:"*1 (a) that Aretino not merely chose the subject, but made direct suggestions as to how it should be presented; (b) that his interest in the evolution of the painting itself lessened the importance (by contemporary central Italian standards) attached to the preliminary disegni as evidence of the artist’s capacity and intentions—foreshadowing thereby Titian’s habit in late life of dispensing with such disegni altogether. Was Dolce, in this context, any kind of a real spokesman for Venice over against Central Italy? All the indications are negative. Certainly, as we have seen, the general nature of his outlook on the work of art and the creative process has its background in the kinds of literary-humanistic discussion that were common in the Venice of his age. But such discussions were surely anything but the unique property of those Venetian circles to which Dolce had access himself. And in fact all his didactic leanings tend—in line with his major dependence upon Vasari—toward reinforcing the practical formulae current at the time in central Italian art circles; at page 23 for example, he is at pains to commend the working out of an inventio in multiple preliminary studies. On the same page, again, he separates invention from execution to the point of suggesting that an artist who is good at the first may be indifferent at the second. If this is Aretinian, then it reflects that initial Tusco-Roman background of Aretino’s which generated one recurrent thread in the man’s artistic thought. What, on the other hand, belongs in the present field of discussion is that other, alternating thread of his thought which was unsystematic and subjective;!*" and between this sort of mentality and Dolce’s own there was surely no connecting bond of any kind, such as might foster novel awareness in the art theory of the Dialogue. 5. Dolce’s phrase “che’l Pittore si elegge da lui stesso” returns us, by contrast, to more positive ground. It seems to reflect what had sprung up earlier as an important current in sixteenth century Italian thought: the increasing recognition after 1500 that the artist was free—relative to the standard Quattrocento types of patronage—(a) to produce uncommissioned works in his own studio, which subsequently he might sell; (b) to create works on his own, for his own pleasure (a liberation above all made possible by the increasing acknowledgment of painting and sculpture as liberal arts); (c) to specialize in a particular genre or class of work (in the case of Venice, landscape painting in particular was newly taken up in this light after 1500).**°

421. See Saxl, Lectures, I, 161ff. kenntniss,’’ Neue Heidelberger Jahrbucher, 10,

122. The presence of this thread was first pointed out 1900, 38ff.

by K. Vossler, ‘‘Pietro Aretinos kunstlerische Be- 123. See on this subject E. H. Gombrich, ‘“Renaissance Artistic Theory ... ,’” GBA, 41, 1953, 335f.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 271 For Dolce to have incorporated a reflection of this current of thought in his definition, we may suppose it to have become already a commonplace in his time. There is a comparable phrase in Pino (ed. Palluchini, p. 103) which lays an even stronger emphasis in the same general direction: “Invenzione . . . s’istende nel trovar poesie, & historie da se; virtu .. .”-—Pino adds, with pontificating judgment, as if the younger artists of his time

had negligently ignored the opening of such doors to them—*“usata da pochi delli moderni.”

“These again are ‘animate’ after their kind” Dolce’s fracture of the antithesis between “animate” and “inanimate” objects, on the

grounds that rocks and grasses may be said to possess a life of their own, goes back ultimately to Aristotle. His more immediate source may well have been Alberti, who says at one point in a roughly similar context (ed. Mallé, p. 97): “Basti cosi avere discorso il movimento delli animanti; ora poi che ancora le cose non animate si muovono in tutti quelli modi quali di sopra dicemmo, adunque et di queste diremo.” PAGE EIGHTEEN

“Order and propriety” In antique writings on the theory of rhetoric, inventio was given no sub-categories. Dolce, by contrast, uses terms familiar to him already from his handling of them in the theory of literature and poetics. 1. Convenevolezza—which I have consistently translated as “propriety” in order to preserve the overall thread of the discussion—is in fact used by Dolce with two meanings which today we should want to separate and distinguish. On the one hand (e.g. at page 18 on Donatello, or in the critique of Michelangelo, pages 4off.) it is used as a moral criterion; on the other hand—and this usage is actually the more general of the two— it is employed (e.g. at pages 18, 21, 22, 29) with the connotations of appropriacy. As far back as in the poetic theory of Horace, upon which Dolce’s literary theory outside of the Dialogue, and his artistic theory within it, are in numerous ways directly based, the two meanings at issue here are already found in suggestive combination and juxtaposition.°* So Dolce had an authoritative precedent for using the term convenevolezza with this double scheme of reference. 2. The term ordine, i.e., arrangement, also appears to have been borrowed from liter-

ary theory; cf. Commentary, p. 17. There the general sense of the term is clear

124. Cf. here Lee, pt. 5,

272, Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

enough: it refers to the manner in which a writer should make events, descriptions and whole narrative sections follow on one another, without offense either to the actual or to the inherently probable time-sequence of the happenings that are being described (cf. here the Aristotelian principles discussed in C, p. 19; also Horace, Ars Poetica, vv. 119, 126ff., etc.). In the theory of rhetoric ordine can likewise carry a definite meaning as a subheading of inventio, in reference to such tricks of presentation as the speaker will plan to introduce in his preliminary “blocking out” of the discourse: tricks, that is, such as rhetorical questions, climaxes, or praeteritio, which means fitting a topic in by announcing that one will omit it. Dolce, in his discussions which belong under the heading of ordine, evidently draws on both of these backgrounds. At page 19 he uses the term in reference to the timesequence of a narrative picture, and at page 20 in reference to matters of setting and architecture. Intermediately and subsequently, on the other hand, he discusses under this heading questions of pose, expression and gesture which have to do with ingenuity of presentation. Indeed, his recourse to these backgrounds is evidently so strict and faithful that no place remains for him to consider the fact that, within the confines of a single work of art, problems of multiple narration or of sequential structure can ipso facto hardly have the same applicability as they do with a narrative poem or a rhetorical discourse. Hence why, from a strictly analytical point of view, his heading of ordine subsumes such a disparate group of topics. 3. One further illustration of the forced nature of Dolce’s grouping and categorization of topics is in order here. When introducing the terms convenevolezza and ordine, Dolce says that these are only the most important of many elements involved where inventio is concerned. Subsequently (at page 23) he details, alongside these two, a fur-

ther group of elements that belong under the same heading: namely the poses, the variety and the “dynamism” of the figures. Now the first of these has already been discussed (pages 22f.); full discussion of the other two, on the other hand, has to wait until the second main heading, disegno, has been reached (vide pages 31f., 32: the third topic is actually specified at the start as being yarte comune col disegno). This analysis illustrates well that slipperiness of categories which I diagnosed above (C, p. 17); and it is of a piece with all this that at the close (page 37) Dolce even adds a fourth main heading or principle, the stirring of the emotions.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 273 “The vessel of divine choice” The phrase il vaso di elettione, based on Acts, 1x, 15 occurs in Dante’s Inferno (1, 28).

However it is likely that Dolce had an even more immediate source for the phrase in a letter of Aretino’s: writing to Francesco Salviati in August 1545 in praise of a drawing and engraving of the Conversion of St. Paul which the artist had sent to him (Came-

sasca, ccxlvii; cf. C, p. 19 for Dolce’s familiarity with this letter), Aretino had referred to St. Paul as “il proprio vaso d’elezione.” Dolce singles out in this passage two different iconographic aspects of St. Paul—his preaching and his conversion—and this may reflect his familiarity with the tapestrycartoons of Raphael, or derivations from them. It is interesting in this connection that

the two compositions from the series which are in question here—the Preaching at Athens and Conversion—are the very two named by the Anonimo Morelliano as visible

in Venice in the early sixteenth century. He cites, under the year 1528, a tapestry of each in the house of M. Giovantonio Venier, and goes on to say that the Preaching had been published as an engraving by Raimondi and that the Conversion cartoon belonged to the Patriarch of Aquileia (Notizie, ed. Frimmel, p. 98). The latter was Marino Gri-

mani, who had inherited the cartoon from his uncle, the Cardinal Grimani; and the Anonimo elsewhere notes, under the year 1521, the presence of the cartoon in the house of the Cardinal, who lived on till 1523 (ibid., p. 104). Since Dolce corresponded at one time with Bishop Giovanni Grimani of the same family,1°> he may well have visited the family residence at some point. “Donatello, who had sculpted a wooden crucifix...” The Crucified Christ referred to is the one carried out for Santa Croce in Florence and still in that church today.!26 Dolce’s source is Vasari’s 1550 Vita of Donatello; the story is told there (Ricci, u, 46ff.) of how Brunelleschi, having criticized Donatello for showing a contadino on the Cross, went on to produce a rival work of his own.

“Even though in modern times no equal of Donatello’s in the art of sculpture may be found, and only one Michelangelo who surpasses him’’ This is a strange way in which to formulate a comparison—no equal, but one superior

artist—and justified only, perhaps, if the Vasarian concept of the “three ages” of art lies at back of it (cf. C, p. 1 for Dolce’s borrowing of this concept). Donatello, it would

125. B. Pino, Nuova sciclta di Lettere, Il, 151, and cf. Cicogna, 146, 179.

126. See H. W. Janson, The Sculpture of Donatello, Princeton, 1957, II, 7-12.

274 Dolce’s ““Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

be implied in this light, carried sculpture as far as the terms of reference appropriate to his age allowed, and so is unrivaled by any sculptor of that same epoch; whereas Michelangelo’s superiority is the superiority possible in a subsequent “new age.” Yet Dolce seems to rule out this implication, or at any rate to confuse the comparison, by placing in the first half of his sentence the phrase ne’ tempi moderni, which should rightly denote the third age as distinct from the second.

“Hence Horace was justified in saying that, in the case of a comedy, what the valet or the master is made to say matters a great deal” The reference is to Horace’s Ars Poetica (of which Dolce had done a translation, published by Pasini-Bindoni in 1535), vv. 114-124:

Intererit multum, Davusne loquatur an Eros, Maturusne senex an adhuc florente juventa Fervidus; an matrona potens an sedula nutrix, Mercatorne vagus cultorne virentis agelli, Colchus an Assyrius, Thebis nutritus an Argis. Aut famam sequere, aut sibi convenientia finge, Scriptor. Honoratum si forte reponis Achillen, Impiger, iracundus, inexorabilis, acer, Jura neget sibi nata, nihil non arroget armis. Sit Medea ferox invictaque, flebilis Ino, Perfidus Ixion, Io vaga, tristis Orestes. Dolce’s “il servo, o il padrone” picks up the first line of this piece; but his paraphrase probably distorts the sense of the original. The point there is not what lines the author gives a character to utter (“che habbia a favellare .. .”), but the need for him to set up a recognizable distinction of manner between master and slave, old man and youth, etc., which can be carried through consistently and fastened onto by the audience. Dolce’s remarks on proprieta here are similar to those of Daniello in his Poetica, 1546 ed., pp. 35ff. PAGE NINETEEN

“Nor again did he [sc. Albrecht Diirer] refrain from giving his Jews features which are

really Germanic...”

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 275 Dolce’s criticism of Diirer here for a failure to observe the rules of proprieta and con-

venevolezza equivalent to the representation of Caesar wearing a Turkish turban or Venetian cap (see page 18) and no less reprehensible is no doubt an explicit reference to Diirer’s painting of Christ among the Doctors (now in the Thyssen Collection, Lugano), which was executed in Venice during the artist’s stay there in 1505-1506 and destined to remain in Italy until 1934.17" The reference immediately before this to Ditirer’s habit of giving the Virgin a German

costume is rather puzzling, since, by analogy with the allusion to the Christ among the Doctors, it should allude to specific works of Diirer’s—several of them, since Dolce says in pitt luoghi. The works which might be taken to fit the reference, to a greater or lesser degree, are the following:

(a) The so-called Feast of the Rose-Garlands, also painted in Venice in 1505-1506 and now in the Prague State Gallery.1*° In this work there seem to be at least seven ladies beside the Madonna—one to her right, and at least six wholly or partly visible to her left.1?9 Panofsky identifies the lady on the Madonna’s right as a nun, those on her left as laywomen!°—i.e., not as sante donne, holy women. An error by Dolce in this particular respect might not tell against the possibility that he is alluding to the Feast, in view of the iconographic problems which the work as a whole presents; but it is less easy to understand why Dolce should only mention the women, when the men are analogously clothed.

(b) The Madonna of the Siskin of 1506, a further product of the Venetian visit of that time (Deutsches Museum, Berlin) ;?*! this fits with Dolce’s words only in regard to the Madonna. (c) Possibly one or more engravings that are now lost—no surviving print fits the

reference except as regards the Madonna. The verb disegno could mean “he made prints,” but there is nothing else to help here. (d) The group of studies for a never-executed Sacra Conversazione which Diirer projected in Nuremburg in 1521-1522." This, oddly enough, is the only extant group of works by Diirer which fits perfectly with Dolce’s allusion (including the verb disegno, which could equally mean ““made compositional studies”). The donor and destination of the work are quite unknown. It is possible that one of the studies for it made its way to Venice, but there is no evidence that this occurred; the Anonimo Morelliano (Notizie, ed. Frimmel, p. 106) cites works by Diirer in the Grimani collection, which Dolce may

127. E. Panofsky, Albrecht Diirer, Princeton, 1943, J votny, Treasures of the Prague National Gallery,

114-16; II, Cat. No. 12 and fig. 156. London, 1960 (?), pl. 20.

128, Ibid., II, Cat. No. 38 and figs. 148-50. 130. Loc.cit.

129. Panofsky’s plate is not easy to read here; but cf. 131. Panofsky, op.cit., II, Cat. No. 27 and fig. 154. the color detail of the right-hand side in V. No- 132. Ibid., II, Cat. Nos. 761-65 and figs. 285-88.

276 Dolce’s “Aretino” and Venetian Art Theory of the Cinquecento

have known (cf. C, p. 18), under the year 1521, but the reference is probably to engravings, since northern drawings were not normally collected in Italy. No definite conclusion can be drawn from the above, but the discussion cumulatively casts some suspicion on Dolce’s phrase in piu luoghi, and makes it possible that he was going beyond strict truth for the sake of a point here.

“Raphael himself kept Diirer’s engravings pinned up in his studio without any vestige of shame”

Vasari had written in his 1550 Vita of Raphael of the latter’s interest in Diirer’s graphic work (Ricci, 111, 105) and was the source for Dolce’s statement here. The engravings of Diirer, together with those of Schéngauer and those of Lucas van Leyden, were widely disseminated in Italy in the Cinquecento and exercised a great influence on artists such as Andrea del Sarto, Pontormo, Lotto, Pordenone and Marcantonio Raimondi. They served as an important source for formal motifs and iconography in general; and, in the absence of any body of northern painting that could suitably be compared, were probably taken automatically by the Cinquecento Italians as representa-

tive of the best in northern art. Dolce’s relevant comments (cf. C, p. 36) show no ability to transcend such a pattern of thought.

“The intaglio of his copper-plate engravings .. . represents the reality and vitality of nature with an incomparable closeness of detail...” Compare the account of Diirer’s art which Aretino had provided in a letter of August 1545 (Camesasca, ccxlvii, already cited; see C, p. 18): “Ne si creda che Alberto Durer circa i lontani e vicini paesi aggiugnesse si oltre. Avenga ch’egli, in contrafargli famoso, manca in cid del disegno che avanza a voi, fattore d’arbori che sono, e non di piante che paiono....”” Dolce, omitting Aretino’s qualifications, draws only on the terms of praise. “ Aristotle in his Poetics gives this same piece of instruction...”

The relevant argument of the Poetics is contained in passages which can be summarized as follows—1449. b, 7: tragedy tends to fall within a single revolution of the sun, or slightly to exceed this; 1450. a, 12: tragedy represents a piece of action, that is of life, complete in itself; 1450. b, 2: a whole has a beginning, a middle and an end, therefore well-constructed plots do not begin and end at random; and 1451. a, 4: the plot must represent a single piece of action, and the whole of it.

Commentary on the Text of the Dialogue 277 Dolce is thus right in finding in the Poetics a forthright statement of the principles of organization, coherence and unity. However his phrasing (as my translation is designed to bring out) implies more than this: namely that Aristotle has stated that drama should, in its own time-sequence, reproduce literally (as it were, hour by hour) the chronology of the original series of events upon which the drama is based; and this despite Aristotle’s effective denial that this was his thesis in a famous passage (1451. b, 10) which suggests that the poet’s object is not to tell what actually happened, but what “could or would happen, either probably or inevitably.” Robortello’s commentary on the Poetics of 1548 gives a good indication of how thinkers of the first half of the Cinquecento—the period when an interest in the Poetics was rekindled, yet had no directive influence of any real significance—were incapable of attributing any meaningful sense to the passage of Aristotle’s just cited. Instead they stuck by the old twin poles of similitudo (naturalism) and pulchritudo (idealism) without effectively conceiving that there might be a third possibility. This failing succinctly explains why the Florentine Mannerism of the 1520’s came into being without the accompaniment of any fully-fledged aesthetic;!8* contemporary thought could not come to grips aesthetically with an art that showed things “as one does not see them.”}** It was probably Piccolomini’s commentary on the Poetics of 1572 that first sought to rectify the impasse thus created. A typical passage there runs (1575 ed., p. 130): “Quando dice Aristotele, che secondo’! verisimile, 6 secondo il necessario, sia fatto la mutatione d’una fortuna all’altra; per necessario, intende il Robortello la verita della cosa; cioé che sia fatta quella mutatione; 6 secondo che veramente accadde; 6 secondo che verisimilmente fusse dovuta accascare. In che stimo io, ch’egli s’inganni; non essendo tenuto il poeta nella sua tragedia a seguir’ il vero, se non in quanto che verisimil sia; dovendo egli piu tosto dar ricetto alle cose impossible & credibili, ch’alle possibili, 6 vere, & non credibili.” There can be no doubt that Dolce—quite expectably, considering his time of writing —has, in erroneously claiming to find in the Poetics a demand for a naturalistic timesequence in drama, transferable into a parallel demand for narrative painting, fallen into the very error that Piccolomini was to stigmatize two decades later.

A similar statement on the need for verisimilitude of chronological order had been offered by Daniello: “Naturale dispositione é, quando’l Poeta dal principio delle cose, ch’egli vuol trattare, incomincia ad ordire il suo Poema: et segue ordinatamente dal prin-

133. Cf. L. Coletti, ‘“Intorno alla storia del concetto del Manierismo,” Convivium, 1, 1948, 801ff.

134. Cf. here W. Friedlander, Mannerism and