Yet, upon the revival of the Arts, in the zenith of the Catholic Religion in Italy, the same encouragement once given, the subjects will be found to be nearly parallel, as far as invention and skill are required; and that, by changing only the names, the same elegance of forms, and the same expression of the passions are necessary to, and apparent in modern, as in an tient representations. The dignified matron may be as happily personified by Maria, as by Juno; the inspired songstress by Cecilia as by Pólybym nia; exquisite ideal beauty may be that of Magdalene, or of Venus. On Trajan's column that head is named Jupiter Pluvius, which has been copied by M. Angelo, and made to express his idea of Jehovah brooding over the chaos. The figure of St. John or Apollo may display the comeliest form of human youth. A similar objection may be made to the winged head of Aoratus or a Cherub, the wings of a Genius or Cupid, as of an Angel, which is a solecism in anatomy, without superadding the muscles necessary to move them. The martyrdom of St. Bartholomew may be rendered equally horrible or scientific, as the flaying of Marsyas. No moment of pathetic expression in the story of Laocoon, or of Niobe, is equal to the group of the crucifixion. Of these striking analogies the sculptors of Italy did not neglect to avail themselves, and most of them had the can dour to allow, that no inconsiderable portion of their own excellence was reflected from the works of the antients. The celebrated Moses of Michel Angelo, attached to the tomb of Julius II. in the Church of the Apostles at Rome, and the group of the dead Christ on the lap of his mother, in St. Peter's, called La Pietà, or the Susanna of Fiamingo, have been placed in no very unequal competition with them, in point of majesty or grace. Without consenting implicitly to the exaggerated praises of D'Argenville in his Lives of the French sculptors, with respect to genius, design, and taste, the names of Puget, Girardon, Coysevox, Bouchardon, and Couston, will be honourably distinguished in the history of modern Art, for their exemplary diligence and success in finishing, which called forth the utmost exertion of talent. From the patronage of the House of Medici, in the fifteenth century, the restoration of the Arts may claim its true date. Painting and Architecture preceded Sculpture, which, as it is susceptible of improve ment from congenial causes, soon made a proportionate progress. Before the age of Donatello, the inventive genius of Italian Artists had applied it to various materials, and produced figures in wood, clay, metals, and marble; yet so rude and incorrect, with the exception of Ghi bertit, as to leave to Donatello the great and deserved name of the Restorer of Sculpture in modern Eu rope. From the era of the Antonines to this period, Sculpture had gradually fallen from comparative perfection into total disuse. the frequent discovery of antique marbles, which were now collecting for the Medicean Museum, and the Academy § established by the magni But *"Giovanni and Nicolo Pisano, Agostino and Agnolo Sanese, whose works, though rude and incorrect, excited the admiration of the times in which they were produced." Roscoe's Lorenzo de Medici, vol. II. p. 255. "His Works are as perfect as the narrow principles upon which the Art was then conducted would allow." Roscoe's Lorenzo, vol. II. p. 257. "Egli (Donatello) fu potissima cagione, che a Cosimo de' Medici si destasse la voluntà dell' introduire a Fiorenza le antichità, che sono, ed erano, in casa de' Medici, le quali tutte di sua mano acconed." Vasari. § This academy was formed in the gardens of Lorenzo, near the Plazza of St. Marco, at Florence, where the school and appendant buildings were furnished with antique statues and fragments, Bertolo, a favourite scholar of Donatello, was the first professor. Those gardens have been celebrated by Vasari, as the nursery of men of genius. (Raggionamenti, p. 75). And had they formed no other than that of M. Angelo, the purpose of the munificent founder would have been fully answered. Mengs (Opere T. II. p. 99-109) observes, "M. Agnolo approfitandosi delle statue raccolto dai Medici, aprigli occhi, e conobbe che gli antichi avean tenuta una certa arte nell' imitare la verità con cui si faceva la imitazione più intelligibile e più bella che nello stesso originale." Duppa's Life of M. Angelo, p. 9. The figure of Cupid sleeping, which after having been buried to give it an ap pearance of genuine antiquity, was purchased by Cardinal Riano, and the anecdote attached to it, are noticed by Roscoe, Leo X. vol. IV. p. 290, 8vo. ficent Lorenzo, concurred with other fortunate circumstances to promote these studies. The splendid Gallery was rendered subservient to its origipal and true purpose, that of inspiring the Florentines, and those who visited Florence, with a correct and genuine taste for the Arts *. A chronological view of the Italian School of Sculpture is given at the elose of this Essay, in a compressed form, that criticisms which have been gathered from various Authors, may be added with all the latitude the nature of this Essay will permit, consist ently with any degree of perspicuity. The chronological view will select rather than enumerate instances, In the Grecian ages, Sculpture was advanced by the talents of many Artists; but its revival in any comparison with classical excellence, is due to the efforts of Donatello, and his school, whilst in that very country so many precious monuments of antiquity re mained unexplored, under ruins. He was the first who exhibited real geDius, and who could impart to his statues animation and grace. M. Angelo is said to have given this extraordinary praise of his figure of St. Mark, addressing it as if alive, "Marco perche non mi parli;" and of the Gates of the Baptistery by Ghiberti, be declared, that "they were so exquisitely wrought, that they were worthy to be those of Paradise." The School of Michel Angelo + formed the second æra of sculpture in Italy. This most illustrious period in the History of the Arts commenced with his return from Rome to Florence, which may be extended from 1500 to 1521, the year in which Leo X. died. Concerning the genius of this truly admirable man, and the change which it effected in the opi nions and works of his contempora ries, much more has been said than can be comprised in these pages; but as the intention of them' is to collect the criticisms of others, those shall be selected which have correctness or novelty to merit our attention. M. Angelo is the only sculptor of modern times that has given the human figure a character, which strictly resembles neither the beauty of the antique, nor the affectation of it, so frequently and unsuccessfully attempted in the present age. He is indeed the genius of his own school, and condescended to imitate none servilely, not even the antients. It is the opinion of one of the most eminent of the modern English criticks, that "he was always attempting to do something better than well; and that though not to be compared with a third-rate Artist of antient Greece in knowledge of the structure and pathology of the human body, he appears to have known more than any of his contemporaries; and when he made his knowledge subservient to his art, and not his art to his knowledge, he produced some compositions of real excellence." But, with more candour, Sir Joshua Reynolds coincides with the panegyrists: "From his infancy he was distinguished for his indefatigable diligence, and this was continued through his whole life, till prevented by extreme old age. The poorest of men, as he observed of himself, did not labour from necessity, * Roscoe's Lorenzo, vol. II. p. 271. "Not one of the great Italian Artists, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, seems to have been completely in possession of the principle of collecting and combining the scattered beauties of Nature, and according it with their figures. They have left no work, either of painting or marble, as the Greeks have done, that is remarkable for this excellence. The acknowledged superiority of Raffaelle lay in other parts of his art, and not in the bellezza of the naked. M. Angelo has it not, though, in truth, he was in possession of every other ability regarding the human figure; but his Moses at St. Pietro in Vincoli, his Christ at the Minerva, his Prophets and other figures at the Sestine Chapel and at Florence, are all of them more to be admired for an elevated grandeur, and for a knowledge and happy accord of all the parts as composing one whole, than for a just propriety in adapting them to the nature of the characters they were meant to represent." Barry on the Arts in England, p. 95. Emeric David Recherches sur l'Art Statuaire, p. 438. +Knight on Gardening, and on the Principles of Taste, p. 391. Reynolds's Works, p. 215, Disc. xv. "Les Statuaires volurent imiter la maniere hardie et fière de Michel Ange; sans rechercher les principes de ce savant Artiste, ils n'egalèrent pas leur modèle, et perdirent le mérite de l'originalité.” · Em. David, p. 447. more more than he did from choice. Indeed, from all the circumstances related of his life, he appears not to have bad the least conception that his art was to be acquired by any other means than great labour; and yet he, of all men that ever lived, might make the greatest pretensions to the efficacy of native genius and inspiration." very curious and interesting account of his peculiar manner of working. The high tone of admiration in which his talents were celebrated by his contemporaries and disciples, has reached our own times. In his Lectures on Painting, Fuseli declares, “that su blimity of conception, grandeur of form, and breadth of manner, are the elements of M. Angelo's style. By these principles he selected or rejected the objects of imitation." Roscoe defines his manner to be " the salt of the art," that peculiar substance which, in a certain degree, united to others, procures them a high taste and relish, but which by itself is too strong and pungent." Similar commendation has been bestowed by others on the Moses. A lively Italian Critick remarks that "this celebrated figure sits as if meant to do nothing; that the These observations are distinctly applied to him, as a Professor of the sister arts. The group of the Pietà in St. Peter's has been considered as the consummation of all M. Angelo's excellencies*; yet the figure of the Virgin has been censured as appearing much too young; but, in fact, the whole group is supernatural; as the dead body could not possibly be sustained, in such a position, by the strength of any individual. Condivi, in his Life of M. Angelo, relates ahead, if the enormous beard were cut conversation with that great Artist, in which he offers the immaculate purity of the Virgin Mary, as a reason for his having thus deviated from human nature in the extraordinary contrast between the dead and living figures. The two statues of prisoners or slaves which were intended to compose a part of the Mausoleum of Julius II. rank among his best works. Falconet, a late French Sculptor, who had long undervalued the modern School of Italy, exclaimed on seeing them, "J'ai vu Michelauge; il est effrayant! M. Angelo is said to have been so cousummate a master of the art of Sculpture, and possessed such a wonderful quickness of eye, that he could make a whole length statue, without setting his points like all other statuaries. Viganeres gives a off, would be that of a satyr with the bristles of a boar, and he is clothed like a lazzarone out of place. Can this characterize a Legislator who conversed face to face with the Divinity?" It forms a part of the Mausoleum of Julius II. in the Church of St. Maria in Vincolo, at Rome . There are likewise two female figures standing, of Religion and Virtue, which are simple and elegant. These several works have a strong and marked character of their own; and deficient as they are in the beauty of the antique, when they are not sublime, they are at least not insipid. Among the successful imitators of M. Augelo, and of those who infused somewhat of his spirit into their own works, were Guglielmo della Porta, and Giovanni di Bologna. His ana *"From the time when he finished this group, his execution was bold and decisive, and the facility of his hand kept pace with the vigour of his mind.” Duppa, p. 193. Milizia, Arte di vedere. "Il ébauchoit ses ouvrages avec chaleur, et quand il voyoit que sa main téméraire avoit enlévé trop de marbre, il les abandonnoit." Emeric David, p. 439. § Milizia, Arte di vedere. Gilpin's Western Tour, p. 22. "In the collection of M. De Praun at Nuremburg, was M. Ångelo's original sketch of his Moses, superior in several points to that which he afterwards executed. Mr. Gilpin observes that the finished statue certainly deserves less praise than it has found. The face is encumbered with beard, and the body with drapery. He particularly condemns the conceit by which M. Angelo bas characterized Moses. Some symbol was necessary to distinguish him from a Roman Consul sitting in a curule chair. He has given him horns, by which he has turned him into a satyr. From whatever silly conceit the idea of giving horns to the great Jewish law-giver origirally sprang, it is certainly absurd in the last degree to see that idea realized in marble. How much better might Moses have been characterized simply by his rod and the two tables of the covenant, which latter, well managed, might have made a broad contrast with the drapery, while in part they might have been covered with it." Western Tour, p. 23. tomical |