Dr. Kim H. Veltman
Appendix 5-Vasari on Foreshortening and Perspective
1. Introduction
2. Foreshortening
3. Perspective
4. Chiaroscuro
5. Architecture
6. Measuring and Surveying
7. Scenography
8. Marquetry
9. Instruments
10. Teaching
11. Omissions
12. Conclusions
Vasari's Lives of the Artists (1550) is the first serious attempt to record developments in painting from the thirteenth through the sixteenth century. With respect to spatial representation Vasari covers a series of topics: foreshortening, perspective in general, chiaroscuro, perspective in connection with architecture, measuring and surveying, scenography, marquetry, instruments and teaching, each of which will be considered in turn.
Vasari sometimes uses the term foreshortening interchangeably with perspective. In most cases, however, he uses it specifically in the context of foreshortened figures. His earliest reference in the Lives concerns Giotto (1266-1377): "The foreshortening in a picture containing a number of deformed beggars is highly praiseworthy, and should be much praised by artists, since it is from these works that the origin of foreshortening is derived". His contribution is mentioned again in the introduction to part two of the Lives: "Giotto in particular improved the attitudes of the figure, and began to give a measure of vivacity to the heads...which made a closer approach to Nature than is seen in the work of his predecessors, while he partially discovered the art of foreshortening". These problems of forehortening were taken up more systematically by Giotto's pupil, Stefano (1301-1350) who mastered them to such an extent that he was nicknamed "Ape of Nature....And although the foreshortenings which he made exhibit, as I have said, a bad manner owing to the difficulties of execution, yet as the first investigator of these difficulties he deserves a much higher place than those who follow after the path has been made plain to them".
In the first decades of the fifteenth century we are told that Masolino (1383-1447): "achieved many difficult foreshortenings admirably, such, for instance, as the poor man who is asking alms of St. Peter, his leg thrust out behind him, so that by means of the shadows on the colouring and the outline of the design he actually appears to be kicking the wall". However, it was his colleague, Masaccio (1401-1428) who "entirely freed himself from Giotto's style" and introduced: "a new method of colouring, of foreshortening...joined to a constant endeavour to get nearer to the truth of Nature in design". Vasari describes the characteristics of this new method in some detail:
As his judgment was excellent, he felt that all figures which do not stand with their feet flat and foreshortened, but are on the tips of their toes, are destitute of all excellence and style in essentials, and show an utter ignorance of foreshortening. Now although Paolo Uccello had devoted himself to this question and had achieved something towards smoothing the difficulty, Masaccio did his foreshortenings much better, varying the methods and taking various points of view, achieving more than any of his predecessors.
Vasari cites Masaccio's Saint Paul in the Brancacci Chapel as an example of this new method: "In this same picture he showed his knowledge of foreshortening a view seen from below in a truly marvelous manner, and in the Apostle's feet, how he has overcome a difficulty and shaken off the old rude manner, which, as I have said, made all the figures stand on the tips of their toes". Vasari also notes that: "More than any other master he introduced nudes and foreshortenings into his paintings, things little practised before his day".
Vasari frequently mentions specific examples of artists work as with Andrea Dal Castagno (c.1410-1457) whose frescoes in the Servite church of Florence contained "a dog foreshortened which has been much admired". In the chapel dedicated to Saint Jerome in the same church: "he made a Trinity with a foreshortened crucifix, so well done that Andrea deserves high praise for it, because he made the foreshortening in a much better and more modern style than his predecessors". Benozzo Gozzoli (1420-1498), while not very remarkable in terms of figures, represented "an ass foreshortened in such a manner that it faces every point of view and is greatly admired". Melozzo da Forli (1438-1494), by contrast:
was a zealous student of art, especially of foreshortening as may be seen in S. Apostolo at Rome in the tribune of the high altar....But this is most clearly seen in a choir of angels in an Ascension of Christ leading him to heaven, the figure of Christ being so well foreshortened that it seems to be passing through the vault, as do the angels, who are flying about in the airy space with varied movements. The apostles also, on the earth, are so well foreshortened in their different attitudes that Melozzo was very much praised then and has been since, by artists who have greatly profited by his labours.
In the case of Ercoli di Roberti (c.1440-1513), note is made of his Crucifixion of Christ which has: "a Longinus mounted on a lean beast foreshortened and standing out wonderfully....Ercole delighted in foreshortening, which is effective when well done, and into this work he introduced a soldier on horseback, the animal raising its fore-legs so that it appears to be in relief". Gentile Bellini (1426-1507) is praised for displaying great pains and diligence partly in "the foreshortening of the distant figures". Sandro Botticelli (1444-1510) is mentioned in passing for "introducing foreshortening and spaces between the groups of angels" in an Assumption of Our Lady (Uffizi). More attention is given to Andrea Mantegna's (1431-1506) work in the Camera degli Sposi (Mantua) where:
there are a number of figures foreshortened from below, which are much admired because, although the drapery is crude and slight and the manner somewhat dry, the whole is executed with great skill and diligence....Andrea improved the foreshortening of figures as seen from below, and this was a difficult and fine invention.
Vasari refers to "many foreshortenings" in Carpaccio's (Vittore Scarpaccia, 1478-1527) story of the Martyrs (Venice, Accademia) and praises Luca Signorelli (1441-1523) for a fresco in the church of San Francesco (Arezzo), where a Saint Michael "puts in his hands a pair of scales, the nudes in either scale, one up the other down, being finely foreshortened" and also for the foreshortenings at Orvieto. The theme of foreshortening recurs in the preface to part three where Vasari mentions "a certain crudeness" in artists such as Piero della Francesca, Andrea del Castagno and Sandro Botticelli, noting that: "these endeavoured to attain the impossible by their labours, especially in foreshortening and unpleasant objects but the effort of producing them was too apparent in the result".
In the next generation Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) is praised for the leaves and branches of the fig tree in his Baptism of Christ (Uffizi); an angel with an arm foreshortened from the shoulder to the elbow; for the "utmost diligence" of the foreshortenings of his anatomical drawings and for the "two foreshortened figures" who are fighting together in the Battle of Anghiari. Antonio da Correggio's (1494-1534) ceiling in Parma is cited "where he has marvellously foreshortened the view". A Resurrection by Butinone, which Vasari attributes to Bramante, is mentioned for its "fine foreshortenings". Mariotto Albertinelli's (1474-1515) " foreshortenings or perspectives" are cited in passing. In the case of Raphael (1483-1520) three items are praised: the saints in the air in the Allegory of the Church in the Stanze; the cherubs in the Espousal of Psyche in the Chigi Palace and "the method of difficult foreshortening of the cartoon of Michelangelo Buonarroti for the Hall of the Council at Florence".
Baldassare Peruzzi (1481-1537) is cited for twelve emperors, standing on pedestals "foreshortened from below with great art"; Andrea del Sarto (1486-1531) for a self portrait "with an arm foreshortened and pointing". Vasari mentions Bastianello Florigorio for a "foreshortened nude figure of St. John which is considered good" and Giovanni Antonio Licinio da Pordenone (1483-1539) who depicted giants fulminated by Jove with "some finely foreshortened corpses lying on the ground"; a "Curtius, on horseback, foreshortened, which seems to be in relief, as does a Mercury also, flying through the air" and scenes from the Bible with Virtues between them in which he displayed "marvellous foreshortening". Rosso Fiorentino's (1494-1541) Assumption is cited for angels which are "beautifully foreshortened", as are those of Lorenzo Lotto (1480-1556) in a panel of the Virgin and Child. Francesco Morone (1473-1529) is mentioned for "some foreshortened heads in the vaulting" and "some angels foreshortened from below"; Giulio Romano (1492-1546), for a vaulting which has a "throne of Jove foreshortened". Perino del Vaga (1500-1547) is praised for four figures, representing Victories "foreshortened from below", and a Pool of Bethesda with "a fine view of the portico foreshortened in perspective".
Several examples from the work of Domenico Beccafumi (1486-1551) are noted: a Lucifer, "remarkable for some nude figures finely foreshortened". In the Sala del Consistorio of the Palazzo Publico of Siena attention is drawn to a: "Justice with the sword and scales, foreshortened from below with marvellous boldness....It is of a beauty impossible to describe to those who have not seen it and produced with more judgment and art than any work similarly foreshortened". In the same room Vasari also refers to the "finely foreshortened figure" of the bodies of the son of Postumius and of Spurius Cassius, and the head of Marcus Manlius. Other works include a Birth of the Virgin with a St. Anne foreshortened in bed, and an Ascension with foreshortened angels. In his life of Giuliano Bugiardini (1475-1554) Vasari recounts how the artist asked Michelangelo:
to tell him how to make the eight or ten principal figures of the soldiers in the act of flight...because he did not know how to foreshorten them in a row in such a narrow space. Buonarroti, taking compassion on him, picked up a piece of charcoal and stretched a row of naked figures foreshortened in various attitudes some falling forward, some falling backward, some dead, others wounded, all done with the judgment and excellence peculiar to him.
Passing mention is made of Cristofano Gherardi (1508-1556), who painted foreshortened figures in a tower of Abbot Bufolini and Girolamo Genga (1476-1551), who painted a Saint Catherine with foreshortening and colouring; Paolo Veronese (1528-1588), for his ceilings of the Council of Ten's chambers with "forehortened figures of great beauty"; Sodoma (1477-1549), for the foreshortened left leg of his Saint Sebastian; Antonio Licino of Pordenone for his scenes of the Passion "with large figures, magnificent colouring and foreshortenings possessing force and vivacity". Links between perspective and forshortening are stated explicitly in the case of Cristofano and Stefano of Brescia who had:
a great reputation among artists for their ability in perspective, and among other things they have represented a corridor of double twisted columns on the flat ceiling of Santa Maria dell'Orto at Venice like those of the Porta Santa at San Pietro in Rome. They form a superb corridor for the church with cross-vaulting and it is seen in the middle of the church finely foreshortened.
Bartolommeo Suardi (1455-1536), also praised in the context of architecture and perspective (see below 5), is cited for a foreshortened Christ and prophets "finely foeshortened from below"; Giovanni da Udine (1494-1564), for a lion and sea horse "highly esteemed for their fine foreshortening"; Battista Franco (1498-1561), for a "fine foreshortened horse jumping over a soldier" and a Saint Mark in the Scuola of San Marco in Venice which contains "a quantity of foreshortenings and figures"; Giovan Francesco Rustico (1474-1554), for a Conversion of Saint Paul: "full of different kinds of horses ridden by the soldiers in various attitudes and foreshortenings"; Daniello Ricciarelli (c.1509-1566), whose Deposition contained a "finely foreshortened Christ with the feet foremost and the rest of the body further back". Michelangelo (1475-1564) is praised for his Pietà with its "foreshortening of the dead Christ and the beauty of the limbs". Special attention is given to the Sistine Chapel where:
he used no perspective or foreshortening or any fixed point of view, devoting his energies rather to adapting the figures to the disposition than the disposition to the figures, contenting himself with the perfection of his nude and draped figures....Men are stupefied by the excellence of the figures, the perfection of the foreshortening.
Vasari describes his depiction of God creating the world "supported by numerous cherubs, with marvellous foreshortening of the arms and legs"; of Hamaan "a wonderfully foreshortened figure"; the sons of Noah, "all the figures being finely foreshortened". In the Last Judgment, which he describes as "the model for all foreshortening and other difficulties of art", Vasari notes the devils "in fine attitudes and admirably foreshortened". As for the other members of hell: "here are foreshortenings which seem in relief, done with softness and harmony, while his treatment of the parts show what paintings may be when executed by good and true masters".
Therafter only three other artists are cited in this context: Francesco Primaticcio (1504-1570), whose Pavilion at Meudon was "decorated with cornices full of foreshortened figures"; Pellegrino Tebaldi (1527-1600), who painted "some fine foreshortened nudes in imitation of those of Michelangelo in the chapel at Rome" and Titian (1477-1576), whose scenes for the Company of La Calza in Venice paid "great attention to the foreshortening from below" and whose Martyrdom of Saint Lawrence shows the saint foreshortened on the gridiron.
Vasari's earliest specific reference to perspective is in the life of Stefano (1301-1350) who: "drew an edifice in perspective perfectly, in a style then little known, displaying improved form and more science". This artist is mentioned again in the introduction to part two of the Lives: "Stefano Scimmia and Tommaso [of Pisa] introduced great improvements in design, in new ideas in perspective and in shading and harmonizing the colours, while adhering to Giotto's style". A next reference is to the frescoes of Domenico Bartoli in the hospital at Siena (1440) "which contain perpectives and other decorations composed with considerable ingenuity". In the case of Jacopo dalla Quercia (c.1371-1438) we are told that he: "displayed much art in making his figures retire gradually on the different planes and in diminishing those which were furthest away". We are told also that he took part in the competition for the doors of the Baptistery in Florence and that his panel was "well designed and executed, but with faulty perspective of the figures".
The criticism of Paolo Uccello (1397-1475) is rather for devoting too much time: "to questions of perspective, for, although these are ingenious and good in their way, yet an immoderate devotion to them causes an infinite waste of time, fatigues nature, clogs the mind with difficulties and frequently renders it sterile where it had previously been fertile and facile". Vasari recounts that when Paolo showed Donatello his "mazzocchi, with projecting points and bosses represented in perspective from different points of view, spheres with seventy two facettes like diamonds", the sculptor would say, "Ah, Paolo, this perspective of yours leads you to abandon the certain for the uncertain; such things as are only useful for marquetry, in which chips and oddments both round and square, and other like things are necessary"".
Vasari credits Uccello with two discoveries, claiming that he was the first who: "brought to perfection the method of representing buildings, to the tops of their cornices and roofs, in perspective from their plans and elevations. This was done by intersecting lines, diminishing at the centre, the point of view, whether high or low, being first decided". In addition we are told that Uccello: "also discovered the method of tracing the ribs and arches of vaulting, the foreshortening of floors by diminishing the receding beams and the way to make round columns follow the turn made by the sharp corner of a house, doing this from a ground plan". This first of these claims is rendered problematic because Vasari elsewhere credits Filippo Brunelleschi (1377-1446) with the same discovery:
He paid great attention to perspective, which was badly understood at the time, many errors being perpetrated and spent much time over it, but at length he discovered unaided a method of getting it perfectly true; this was to trace it with the ground plan and elevation by means of intersecting lines, a useful addition to the art of design.
This discrepancy resolves itself if we accept that Brunelleschi made a preliminary demonstration and take seriously Vasari's words that Uccello brought this method "to perfection". This does not however remove a second difficulty, namely, that the first extant evidence of such a combination of ground plan and elevation is found in Piero della Francesca's On the Perspective of Painting (c.1480).
There are other discrepancies between modern views and those of Vasari. Historians now claim that Masaccio's Trinity was the first painting to use perspective in a technical sense. By contrast, Vasari claims that an Annunciation by Uccello:
was the first work which showed to artists in a good style how lines may be made to diminish toward the vanishing point with grace and proportion and demonstrated how a small and insignificant space on a plain surface may be made to appear large and remote, and those who are able to add the lights and shadows to this in their proper places cause a veritable illusion to the eye so that a painting is made to appear real and in relief.
We are told that Uccello's next challenge was to represent "some columns foreshortened in perspective, which bend round and break the sharp angle of the vaulting" and that he: "continued to perservere with his vanishing point, doing everything which he saw: fields, arable land, ditches and other details of nature in his sharp, dry style". Vasari also describes Uccello's work in the cloisters of Santa Maria Novella:
His use of perspective in this, in the diminution of figures, the representation of large masses and other things, is certainly very striking....Here in perspective he made a cask, the curved lines being considered very fine. Here also is a trellis-work covered with grapes, the squares of which diminish towards the vanishing point; but he was at fault because the diminution of the lower plane, where the feet of the figures are set, follows the lines of the trellis, and the cask does not follow the same vanishing lines.
This appears to be one of the first extant cases where an artist is taken to task for getting his perspective wrong. Besides these cases of ecclesiastical art we are told that: "many houses of Florence possess a number of small pictures in perspective for the sides of couches, beds and other things by Paolo's hand". Uccello is reported to have stayed up all night long in his study "to work out the lines of his perspective" and to have replied to his wife's calls with "Oh what a sweet thing is perspective". His devotion to the topic led him to die in poverty.
Vasari describes two of Lorenzo Ghiberti's (1378-1455) panels on the doors of the Baptistery at Florence, one when Jacob's sons return after being recognized by Joseph in which "Lorenzo attempted a difficult task in the representation of a round temple in perspective", the other, in which the Queen of Sheba visits Solomon, where Ghiberti "introduced a building in perspective with great effect". In the case of Masolino (1383-1447) we are told simply that he "was fairly skillful in perspective". Masaccio, on the other hand, is praised because:
he diligently studied methods of work and perspective in which he displayed wonderful ingenuity, as is shown in a scene of small figures now in the house of Ridolfo del Ghirlandaio, in which, besides the Christ delivering the man possessed, there are some very fine buildings so drawn in perspective that the interior and the exterior are represented at the same time, as he took for the point of view not the front but the side, for its greater difficulty.
Vasari specifically mentions his Trinity in Santa Maria Novella in which: "the most beautiful thing there besides the figures is a barrel vault represented in perspective and divided into squares full of bosses which gradually diminish so realistically that the building seems hollowed into the wall". Vasari does not claim, however, that this was the first work in perspective. Indeed, as noted earlier, he attributes priority to Uccello in this regard.
Donatello (1386-1466), who criticized Uccello for his over-enthusiasm in the subject, is himself reported by Vasari to have been "versed in perspective" and cited for two works: the predella of the high altar of the Franciscan church in Padua with its Life of Saint Anthony of Padua which had bas reliefs so well done that: "masters of the art have been struck dumb with admiration in beholding them when they have considered...such a number of remarkable figures placed in diminishing perspective". Vasari also mentions his "Evangelists in perspective, partly painted, partly bas-relief" in San Lorenzo in Florence.
With respect to the early theorists, Vasari cites Alberti who: "having studied the Latin tongue and practised architecture, perspective and painting, has left works to which modern artists can add nothing". Vasari refers to an instrument that he invented (see below 9) and to his three books On Painting, but not to his Elements of Painting. Vasari describes Piero della Francesca as "a consummate arithmetician, geometrician and perspectivist", noting his activities in Urbino and that:
some of his writings on geometry and perspective are still preserved there, and in these he proves himself not inferior to anyone in his own day, or perhaps of all time. All his works give evidence of his skill , being full of perspectives, especially a vase represented so as to show its front and back, its sides, its bottom and its mouth.
Vasari claims that he: "assiduously studied perspective, and had a thorough acquaintance with Euclid, so that he understood better than anyone else all the curves in regular bodies, and we owe to him the fullest light that has been thrown on the subject" .We are told how Piero's pupil, Pacioli, acquired his manuscripts and published them as his own, without being given the names of these works. In terms of Piero's practical work Vasari refers only to a "Saint Donato in perspective" and to the "admirable perspective of diminishing columns" of his Annunciation (now Perugia).
Andrea dal Castagno's work which excited the greatest admiration was a Christ at the Column: "where he introduced a loggia with columns in perspective, the crossing of the vaults diminishing and the walls with their oval compartments depicted with such art that it is clear that he was as completely a master of the difficulties of perspective as of design". His colleague Domenico Veneziano (c.1400-1461) is praised for a Virgin Ascending the Steps of the Temple which contains:
in perspective in the middle of a piazza an octagonal temple, standing alone and full of pilasters and niches, beautifully adorned on its facade with marble figures and a number of fine buildings round the piazza on which the sun is throwing the shadow of the temple, the whole beautifully and artistically contrived.
In the case of Benozzo Gozzoli we are simply told that he was "prolific in animals, perspective, landscapes and animals". Melozzo da Forli is mentioned for a frieze "drawn in perspective" and because he "was very skilful in perspective as the buildings shown here prove". Vasari records that Gentile Bellini "represented the Grand Canal in perspective"; a scene with the Emperor Barbarossa "containing many fine perspectives"; a related scene in which a "palace and San Marco are drawn in perspective" and a naval scene with "boats drawn in perspective". His co-worker, Alvise Vivarini, "painted an open church in perspective", next to which was a reception "with a fine perspective of buildings". Giovanni Bellini "drew Rome in perspective, taken some distance off".
In Rome, Cosimo Rosselli (1439-1507) painted a Last Supper in which: "he represented an octagonal table in perspective, the roof above being likewise octagonal, the whole very well foreshortened and showing that he understood this art as well as others did".
Domenico Ghirlandaio (1449-1494) is cited for the "perspective of the Ponte Santa Trinità in grisaille"; a Virgin Mounting the Steps of the Temple which: "contains a building diminishing correctly as it recedes from the eye, as well as a nude figure, which gave great satisfaction then, because such things were not common." Ghirlandaio is also mentioned for a dance of Herodias with "a large building shown in perspective and in conjuction with the paintings displays Domenico's skill". Antonio Pollaiuolo (1432-1498) is referred to in passing for an altarpiece with "some remarkable horses, nude figures and perspectives".
Andrea Verrocchio is described as having studied geometry in his youth and is the second artist in the Lives specifically referred to as a "perspectivist", although no work of his is mentioned by name in this context. Bernardino Pinturicchio (c.1454-1513) is criticized for his errors in perspective because: "he made the arches of Rome in relief and painted the scene such that, the figures being in front and the buildings behind, the receding objects are more prominent than the figures in the foreground, a capital heresy in our art".
Pietro Perugino (1446-1523), is mentioned for his painting of Blessed John Columbine with its "lovely receding perspective which won much deserved praise, because Pietro paid special attention to this branch". Four works of Carpaccio (Vittore Scarpaccia) are mentioned: a Noli me tangere (Venice, Accademia) with "a very beautiful receding perspective of a distant landscape", "a beautiful perspective of houses as a background for the work at the altar of the Virgin"; "a perspective with two staircases and many loggias" in a scene where Saint Mark is healing a sick man and "a very excellent perspective of houses" in a painting of Saint Thomas Aquinas. We are told that Bramante: "instructed Raphael of Urbino in many points of architecture and sketched for him the buildings which he later drew in the perspective in the Pope's chamber, representing Mount Parnassus. Here Raphael drew Bramante measuring with a compass". Here Vasari obviously means Raphael's School of Athens in which Bramante is shown in the lower right.
Vasari refers to Mariotto Albertinelli's "foreshortenings or perspectives" as if the terms were interchangeable and praises his designs in grisaille: "especially a spiral staircase, drawn in perspective the difficulties of which he thoroughly understood". In his life of Raphael, Vasari refers to the Sposalizio (now Brera) which: "contains a temple drawn in perspective, so charmingly that it is a wonder to see how he confronted the difficulties of this task". Vasari also describes the Disputà, which he confuses with the School of Athens, noting that he:"adorned this work with a perspective and many figures, so delicately and finely finished that Pope Julius caused all the other works of the other masters, both old and new to be destroyed".
Raphael in turn "taught the first principles of perspective to Fra Bartolommeo", "which he had previously neglected" and as a result of which he painted a Saint Sebastian done on a half circle where: "he made a niche in perspective, which seems in relief on the picture and he formed a frame by painting an ornament about it". Guglielmo da Marcilla (1467-1537) is praised for his colour perspective because he made: "the principal figures the lightest, and gradually darkening the others as they receded, displaying great excellence in this respect". In the Duomo at Arezzo this artist also made a window which "contains a temple in perspective, with steps and figures appropriately composed".
We are told that Baldassare Peruzzi: "studied perspective making such progress that few in our day have equalled him, as his works clearly show". Mention is made of the Farnesina which has a hall: "decorated with columns in perspective which makes it appear larger than it really is" and also a loggia in which: "the decoration in perspective, formed of stucco and colours, is so excellent that even to artists it seems in relief. I remember that, when I took the great painter, Titian, to see it, he could not be persuaded that it was a painting, but on being convinced he was amazed". For the wardens of San Petronio in Bologna, to make a model for the facade, Peruzzi prepared plans and sections, "the perspective being so managed that the edifice appears in relief".
Andrea del Sarto is praised for his grisaille work, for "a magnificent perspective and some very difficult steps up to Caesar's seat", for an Indian with a cage containing parrots, "rarely drawn in perspective" and implicitly for his atmospheric perspective: "for he understood light and shade and the vanishing into darkness". In some cases Vasari limits himself to mentioning only a single piece in perspective: Pellegrino di San Daniello for the doors of the organ at Udine "on which he represented a deep arch in perspective"; Giovanni Antonio Sogliani (1492-1544) for a Saint John the Baptist "with a perspective representing the exterior of the chapter house of the Pazzi"; Bartolommeo da Bagnacavallo (1484-1542) for a Dispute of Saint Augustine, "with a meritorious perspective". Francabigio receives several mentions in this regard: an Annunciation with "a much admired and ingenious building in perspective"; a fine apparatus for the wedding of Duke Lorenzo "with two perspectives for the comedies then presented"; at Poggio a Caiano "a fine scene with some buildings well measured in perspective" and a Bathsheba, with a "building in perspective". Francesco Mazzuoli (1504-1540) is again mentioned only once for a "perspective in fresco" in the refectory of the nuns at Parma; as is Battista del Moro for his Saint Eustace "with a landscape full of trees gradually diminishing as they recede". Francesco di Bonsignori (c.1445-1519) receives two mentions: for his Last Supper in the church of San Francesco at Mantua with "a perspective of great beauty" and for a painting in the Gonzaga Palace in the same city showing "jousting on the Piazza of San Piero, represented in perspective".
Vasari claims that Dürer's Life of the Virgin in 20 sheets (1511) is "incomparable for invention, composition, perspective, buildings", although none of these sheets is correct in terms of technical rules of linear perspective; mentions that Dürer left works on perspective and showed discretion, "the more distant objects gradually fading from sight as they do in nature". We are told that Hieronymus Cock produced "twenty different buidings" for a certain "Verese, the painter and eminent perspectivist", which may be a reference to Jan Cornelis Vermeyen.
The next Italian artist mentioned is Giulio Romano, who "represented San Pietro in perspective, with the papal residence as it stands". Perino del Vaga is cited for a Pool of Bethesda with a "fine view of the portico foreshortened in perspective" and a Resurrection of Lazarus "with some small temples diminishing as they recede done with great skill". Vasari reports that in the home of Marcello Agostini (i.e. the Palazzo Bindi Sergardi) Domenico Beccafumi painted an ancient sacrifice with a "temple in perspective, a thing in which Domenico especially excelled" and that as a result of this he was invited by the Sienese government to paint the Sala del Consistorio which includeed a fresco of the censors, Marcus Lepidus and Fulvius, with "buildings and temples in perspective showing his intimate acquaintance with that art". Niccolo Soggi is noted for having "attained to high excellence in perspective", specifically for an Annunciation "with a buiding in perspective, containing arches and vaulting"; for a building "with columns and arches in perspective" in a Circumcision which he helped Domenico Pecori to complete; and for teaching his pupil Domenico Giuntalocchi this subject. Cristofano Gherardi is mentioned only for a roof which has its "cornice in perspective". Vasari criticizes Jacopo Pontormo because: "he has not anywhere observed the order of the scene, measure, time, variety of the heads, changes of the flesh-tints, or any rule, proportion or perspective".
He refers only in passing to the "rare perspectives" of Paolo Veronese in his Banquet given to Christ by Simon the Leper (Verona) and again criticizes a painting of the Magi by Nicolo Arrigo, a Fleming (i.e. Enrico Palledini of Malines), "which would be very meritorious were it not confused and over-coloured thus destroying the distances". This problem of colouring is taken up again in the life of Giovanni da Udine who:
did some beautiful foliage, bosses and ornaments of stucco and gold, diminishing gradually towards the central point. But in one thing he lacked judgment as on the flat friezes forming the ribs of the vaulting he made foliage, birds, masks and figures which cannot be seen from the ground owing to the distance and because thery are made on a coloured ground....If he had coloured them they would be visible.
By this time Vasari is clearly concerned with colour and disappearance of form perspective as well as linear perspective. Hence in his life of Francesco Salviati, Vasari makes the general observation: "It is necessary above all to have vivacious and graceful heads, not crude ones, and so much black in the nudes that they stand out in relief and fade into the distance, as may be required, to say nothing of the perspective, landscapes, and other parts of a good painting".
Vasari tells us that Giovan Francesco Rustico (1474-1554), having learned to "draw in perspective and carve marble", made an Annunciation in half-relief "with a fine perspective"; and notes that a Visitation (1538) by Francesco, called De'Salviati, is "remarkable for its invention, composition, regular diminution of the figures, perspective, architecture, nudes, draperies, graceful heads and indeed every part". He reports that Titian, having begun with works executed with fineness subsequently turned to "an impressionist manner, with bold strokes and blobs, to obtain the effect at a distance". He praises the Farnese Hours by Giulio Clovio, as being more divine than human because of the "the perfection of the colouring, the receding figures, the buildings, landscapes and all the requisites of perspective". Of his own work, Vasari cites his "designs for ten leading cities of the state, represented in perspective, with their founders and arms" now in the courtyard of the Palazzo Vecchio in Florence.
We have already noted how, in the course of the Lives, Vasari's concerns shift from linear perspective to include problems of colour, disappearance of form and atmospheric perspective. On several occasions he specifically mentions chiaroscuro, by which he clearly means something different than we do today. For instance, Vasari praises Duccio: "since in the pavement of the Duomo at Siena he initiated the setting in marble of figures in chiaroscuro, in which modern artists have performed wonders to be seen there in these days....Imitating the paintings in chiaroscuro he designed the first part of the pavement with his own hand".
The term is mentioned again in the case of Antonio of Venice (1309-1383), who is described as: "so excellent in chiaroscuro that some sheets of his in our book, in which he did the arch of San Spirito, are the best of the age". Vasari goes on to report that Dello (1404-1453): "was among the first to discover the importance of a just representation of the muscles of naked bodies, as is seen in some designs of his in chiaroscuro in our book. His portrait in chiaroscuro occurs in the scene of the drunkedness of Noah...in Santa Maria Novella by the hand of Paolo Uccello".
That chiaroscuro was linked with specific colouring techniques is evident from a decription of Parri Spinelli, who, we are told : "was the first who ceased to use verdaccio as a ground for his flesh-tints to cover them afterwards with red flesh colour and chiaroscuro in the manner of water-colour as Giotto and the other older painters had done". This method is referred to again in connection with Masaccio, who while he was working in the Brancacci chapel: "the consecration of the Carmine Church took place, and as a memorial of this Masaccio painted the scene as it occured in verde terra and chiaroscuro in the cloister over the door leading to the convent".
Leon Battista Alberti is mentioned as having made "a picture of somewhat large figures in chiaroscuro". Sometime in the latter half of the fifteenth century this method appears to have been abandoned as we learn from Vasari's account of a drawing in grisaille of Judith and Holofernes done by Andrea Mantegna: "It is done in chiaroscuro in a style no longer in use, as he has left the lights unpainted, and so clearly marked that the hairs and other delicate things may be seen as carefully done as if they had been painted with a brush, so that this may in some sense be called a coloured work rather than a drawing".
A different method is apparently being described in the work of Domenico Beccafumi, who: "took dark marble to form a shadow for the white and making outlines with the chisel, he found he could thus obtain the effect of chiaroscuro". Vasari reports that Beccafumi also "did wood blocks for printing in chiaroscuro"; while Jacopo Da Pontormo painted the cars of a triumph (see below 7) "with scenes in chiaroscuro", but gives no further details concerning the techniques involved.
Connections between perspective and architecture are often implicit as when Vasari describes Alberti as practicising "architecture, perspective and painting" or when he describes Masaccio as having shown Brunelleschi "many points in architecture" (see above section 3). Sometimes these connections are nearly explicit as when he describes Donatello as "versed in perspective and highly esteemed in architecture", or Bramante as one who "always delighted in architecture and perspective". We are told that Girolamo Genga (1476-1551): "joined Perugino, a celebrated painter, with whom he remained about three years, studying perspective, which he mastered so well as to become excellent, as his works on painting and architecture show".
With Andrea dal Monte San Savino (1460-1529), his "difficulties of architecture and perspective" are mentioned together, while in the case of the architect, Baccio D'Agnolo (1462-1543), Vasari begins by noting that some recent artists and architects have been "ignorant of even the technical terms, without an elementary knowledge of perspective", before launching into an eloquent statement of how architecture, perspective, sculpture and painting are inseparably linked:
Architecture can only attain perfection in the hands of those who possess the highest judgment and good design, and who have had great experience in painting, sculpture and wood carving. For in it men measure the bodies of their figures, such as columns, cornices, basements, and all the orders which are made solely for the purpose of embellishing their figures and thus carvers in the process of time become architects by constant practice. Sculptors, also, in making ornaments for tombs and other things, come to understand that art, while the painter in his perspectives, the variety of inventions, and the buildings drawn by him cannot fail to make plans, for no steps or surfaces of the figures are ever prepared without some architecture being first introduced.
These connections are again alluded to in the life of Giulio Romano who, we are told, "became skilled in drawing perspectives, measuring buildings and making plans". In his life of Baldassare Peruzzi, Vasari describes that he "studied the treasures of Rome, especially in architecture ....He also studied perspective". Bartolommeo Suardi (1455-1536), whom Vasari also mentioned for his foreshortenings, is praised for a Birth of the Virgin with "a receding perspective admirably arranged", which does not surprise Vasari because the artist "thoroughly understood architecture".
Perspective could in turn influence architecture as we learn from the case of Bramantino, whose facade of Bernardo Scalcalarozzo's home: "brought him praise because he was the first painter in the good style there and led to Bramante's excellence in architecture by the good style of his buildings in perspective". With the sculptor, Fra'Giovann'Agnolo Montorsoli (1507-1563), another factor combined with this. We are told how he made many friends in Genoa: "and especially with some physicians who helped him with anatomy, and by this means and by studying architecture and perspective, the friar became excellent".
Jacopo Barozzi (il Vignola), now famous for a treatise on perspective, is cited by Vasari for connections between perspective, architecture, ruins (see below 6) and marquetry (see below 8). At Caprarola, Vignola drew perspectives of buildings "coloured by his son-in-law, of great beauty, and they make the room appear larger". Connections between architecture and perspective are again implicit in the case of Titian's student, Paris Bordone (1506-1571), whose finest painting of a Fisherman Presenting the Ring to the Signoria of Venice contained a "fine building in perspective, about which the doge and senate are seated", and whose large picture for the Prineri family in Augsburg included "the five orders of architecture in perspective".
In addition to such general connections between architecture and perspective, it is striking how many of the early masters of perspective were specifically involved with the study of Roman ruins; the careful measurement of ancient monuments; and making ground plans and elevations of modern buildings. Vasari reports how Brunelleschi, who developed the first perspective panels went to Rome with Donatello, was overwhelmed by the grandeur of the buildings and: "set to work to measure the cornices and take the plans of these buildings. He and Donato...took measurements of everything when they had the opportunity". After Donatello returned to Florence, Brunelleschi:
studied the more ardently and diligently among the ruins of ancient buildings. He drew every sort of building, round and square, and octagonal churches, basilicas, aqueducts, baths, arches, colosseums, amphitheatres, and every temple of brick noting the methods of binding and clamping as well as the turning of the vaulting....He then studied the Doric, Ionic and Corinthian orders, one after the other, and to such purpose that he was able to reconstruct in his mind's eye the aspect of Rome as it stood before its fall.
Vasari notes that Leon Battista Alberti wrote a book "on measuring elevations", but does not mention the Descriptio Urbis Romae by name. Domenico Ghirlandaio, whose paintings contained striking examples of perspective, also studied Roman ruins, using his own particular method. When he: "was drawing antiquities at Rome, such as arches, baths, columns, colosseums, amphitheatres, aqueducts, etc., his drawing was so exact that he was able to work with his eye unaided by rule or compass, and that the dimensions were as accurate as if he had measured them. When he drew the colosseum, he introduced a figure to scale which, when it was tested by the masters after his death, proved most correct". In the case of Bramante we learn that he:
drew many ground-plans and elevations, which were excellently designed, some well measured and artistically conceived ones being in our book. He instructed Raphael of Urbino in many points of architecture and sketched for him the buildings which he afterwards drew in perspective in the Pope's chamber representing Mount Parnassus [i.e. the School of Athens].
Vasari notes that "those who measure ancient monuments find no less science and design in the works of Bramante", adding that one of Bramante's assistants was Ventura, who "was fond of measuring the monuments of Rome". Interestingly enough, when Bramante was a paralytic old man, and Antonio da San Gallo assisted him, that artist was given the care of many things once Bramante found that his measurements were correct. Simone Pollaiuolo, (Il Cronaca, 1457-1508), a relation of Antonio, is also said to have observed "the fine antiquities of the city [of Rome], measuring them with great diligence".
The effects of these efforts were, however, not always positive. A few paragraphs later Vasari describes a less felicitous case where another architect had placed a great antique cornice measured from one at Montecavallo and placed it on a small facade: "It is of no purpose to make excuses as many artists do, saying that they are carefully measured from antiquities and copied from good masters, for a good judgment and an exact eye are of more value than compasses".
Baldassare Peruzzi: "began a book on the antiquities of Rome, and a commentary on Vitruvius, which he illustrated, some of his designs for this being still in the possession of Francesco da Siena, his pupil, containing drawings of antiquities and modern methods of building". Many of Peruzzi's notes were inherited by Sebastiano Serlio, whose second book of architecture was on perspective, and who also did a: "fourth book of the survey of the antiquities of Rome, being greatly aided by the studies of Baldassare [Peruzzi], some of which were put in the margin". These studies sometimes took many years. The natural son of Stefano of Verona, Giovannmaria (Falconetto, 1458-1534):
began to draw all the antiquities of his native Verona. He next went to Rome to learn architecture of the marvelous remains there, which are the real teacher, and he spent twelve years in the city, chiefly engaged in seeing and drawing antiquities, making plans and noting measurements, there being nothing that he did not draw to scale....Not content with the treasures of Rome itself, he drew all that was beautiful in the Campagna of Rome, in Naples, in the duchy of Spoleto and other places....He thus studied carefully all the antiquities, making careful measurements.
When Giulio Romano studied with Raphael we are specifically told that he "became skilled in drawing perspectives, measuring buildings and making plans". While working on the cycle of Constantine in the Stanze: "he studied the ancient columns of Trajan and Antoninus making great use of them for the dresses of the soldiers, the armour, ensigns, bastions, stockades, rams and other implements of war". When Giulio Romano first met Vasari he took four days in showing all his works: "especially the plans of ancient buidings at Rome, Naples, Pozzuolo, Campagna and all the other principal antiquities designed partly by him and partly by others".
While in Rome, Girolamo Genga also "measured the antiquities and his heirs possess writings by him upon these". When Girolamo decided that his son, Bartolommeo Genga (1518-1558), was better suited to architecture than to painting: "he detained him for some months, teaching him perspective, and then sent him to Rome to see the marvellous ancient and modern buildings. All of these he measured during the four years he spent there, and made great progress". Similarly Michele San Michele (1484-1559): "studied ancient architecture with such diligence, measuring and carefully observing everything, that in a short time he became famous not only in Rome, but in all the neighbourhood". It will be recalled that Aristotile da San Gallo, in passages cited earlier, "measured the plans of buildings and carefully studied perspective".
Nor did these studies remain limited to the city of Rome. In the case of Bramantino (Bartolommeo Suardi) Vasari reports: " remember having seen a fine book in the hands of Valerio Vincentino containing the antiquities of Lombardy drawn and measured by Bramantino and the plans of many noble edifices". Giovanni da Udine also studied in Rome and: "learned to make landscapes with ruins, and fragments of antiquities, colouring them in a style since adopted by Italians as well as Flemings".
Jacopo Barozzi (il Vignola), cited earlier in connection with architecture, gained particular distinction for his work with the Vitruvian Academy at Rome where he took "measurements of all the antiquities" there, which led to his being employed by Primaticcio to model "a great part of the antiquities of Rome to be sent to France". In 1540, the king of France personally sent Primaticcio to Rome "to procure marble antiquities". Vasari records that he himself:
arrived in Rome in February 1538 and stayed there all June. I proposed in company with my boy, Giovanni Battista Cangi of Borgo, to draw all that I had left on my previous visits, especially what was underground in the grottoes. There was nothing in architecture or sculpture which I did not draw or measure. I can say without exaggeration that I did more than 300 drawings in that period.
A number of the individuals mentioned for their activities in perspective were also engaged in scene-painting. Brunelleschi, who made the first perspective demonstrations, was also responsible for the elaborate apparatus of the Paradise of San Felice in the piazza of Florence for the representation or feast of the Annunciation, which Vasari spends nearly two full pages describing. Franciabigio, besides his paintings in perspective, "did a fine scene with some buildings well measured in perspective". Girolamo Genga, mentioned above in connection with perpective and architecture, was employed by the Duke of Urbino: "especially to make apparatus and scenery for comedies, in which he succeeded admirably, owing to his knowledge of perspective and the principles of architecture". Similarly, his son, Bartolommeo Genga, "was an ingenious deviser of masques and excellent in the apparatus for comedies and scenes".
Study of perspective could also lead to scenography. Bastiano (called Aristotile) da San Gallo (1481-1551), shared his family's interest in architecture and therefore "measured the plans of buildings and carefully studied perspective". Indeed, "being fond of perspective, which he had studied at Rome under Bramante, Bastiano seemed to care for nothing else". But lacking the invention and design necessary for painting he: "resolved to make architecture and perspective his profession and painted scenery for comedies at every opportunity that presented himself".
He learned "to do many things perfectly in perspective" from his neighbour, Andrea del Sarto, with whom he did the scenes for a comedy and not long after "another perspective for another comedy". His nickname is said to have come about because he was as eminent in perspective as Aristotle in philosophy. When Duke Alessandro came to rule Florence there was a tragi-comedy about Tamar for which Aristotile "made one of the most beautiful scenes ever beheld", and which led to another comedy for which he "made fine scenery and a perspective full of colonnades, niches, tabernacles, statues and other things not used before". The occasion of the wedding of the Medici Duke with Margaret of Austria involved a comedy by Lorenzo di Pier Francesco de'Medici with steps in perspective, "a canvas painted in perspective with buildings", "many side scenes in relief, and a marble arch in the middle full of reliefs and statues, with receding streets" by Aristotile. When Cosimo de Medici married Leonora of Toledo on 27 June 1539, Aristotile made a scene representing Pisa in which Vasari claims "it would be impossible to assemble a greater variety of windows, doors, facades of palaces, streets and receding distances, all in perspective". He also represented the leaning tower, cupola and the round church of San Giovanni: "imparting grace to the perspective above, so that nothing better of its kind could be desired. He next devised a...lantern...behind the buildings, and a sun...made of a crystal ball...illuminating the sky of the scenery and the perspective so that it looked like a veritable sun". Vasari reports that both he and Antonio Particini owned designs including several sheets in perspective and that in his later years:
Aristotile did scenery every year for the comedies played at the carnival, having become so skilled in that branch that he proposed to write upon it and to teach it. However this proved more difficult than he had thought and he gave it up, especially as the governor of the palace got him to employ Bronzino and Francesco Salviati to make perspectives.
In his life of Battista Franco, Vasari mentions a company of painters, sculptors and architects, which included Battista and his friend, Bartolommeo Ammannati, who "were charged to do the scenery and decorations". Francesco, called De'Salviati, besides perspective, did "beautiful scenery for a comedy", and: "one carnival year he did the scenery for a comedy, judged superior to any made in Florence up to that time". Links between architecture and scenography are also mentioned in the case of the architect, Andrea Palladio, who "made a wooden colosseum for the performance of a tragedy" and Jacopo Sansovino, who, besides directing "the erection of many wooden triumphal arches in various parts of" Florence," was frequently employed "for scenery, theatres, arches, and the like".
Not unrelated are Vasari's references to triumphs and triumphal arches. In addition to the ones by Sansovino cited earlier there was the triumph directed by the professor of Greek and Latin at Florence, Andrea Dazzi, "with scenes in chiaroscuro, representing the transformations of the gods" by Pontormo. Vasari mentions that when he went up to Bologna to see his friends he "found them at work on some triumphal arches for the coming of Charles V", and that in 1536, when the same emperor was planning to visit Florence, Vasari himself made "the facade of a triumphal arch, forty braccia high by twenty broad".
Vasari relates the origins of perspective directly to the development of inlaid woodwork. He describes how Brunelleschi, having finished his second panel: "showed it to those who do tarsia work, which is the art of inlaying coloured woods, stimulating them to such an extent that he gave rise to many good and useful things produced both then and afterwards which have brought fame and profit to Florence for many years".
We are told that Giuliano da Maiano (1432-1490) began as a carpenter and made the benches of the sacristy of the Nunziata "in conjunction with Giusto and Minore, masters of marquetry"; and later: "employed Guido del Servellino and Maestro Domenico di Mariotto, Pisan carpenters, and taught them the art so well that they afterwards did the greater part of the choir in intaglio and carved work, which was finished in our own day....by Battista del Cervelliera". Of Benedetto da Maiano (1442-1497) we are told that he was: "the best artist of the method introduced...in the time of Filippo Brunelleschi and Paolo Uccello, of joining small pieces of coloured wood together to make perspectives".
Vasari mentions that it was by his influence that Fra Bartolommeo of San Marco went to study with Cosimo Rosselli. He also reports that Francesco di Paolo Giamberti had two sons, Giovanni (1445-1516) and Antonio (1455-1534) da San Gallo and that he put them with "Francione, a clever joiner, who practised both wood carving and perspective" as a result of which: "Giuliano carved the most beautiful perspectives for the choir of the Duomo of Pisa, where they are considered marvelous even among new works". Vasari mentions Pisa in this context again in discussing Perino del Vaga's arrival there from Genoa, when he was shown the beginning of a decoration by "Battista del Cervelliera, a connoisseur and a master of marquetry".
We are told that while Raphael was working at the Stanze in the Vatican he sent for Frà Giovanni of Verona "then a great master in marquetry" who: "not only did the wainscoting, but the fine doors and seats with perspectives", and did "admirable perspectives in wood in the sacristy of Santa Maria in Organo in Verona". In his section on Veronese artists, Vasari describes Fra Giovanni again as "a master of marquetry and carving", for having done the carvings in this church, adding that its sacristy: "possesses a row of inlaid benches, containing perspectives unequalled at the time and probably even in our own days one would not see much better".
In the life of Francesco De'Salviati Vasari refers in passing to "Francesco di Prato, goldsmith and marquetry worker" who was head of the woodwork of the opera. Connections between perspective, architecture and marquetry are implicitly mentioned in the life of Baccio d'Agnolo who: "in his early youth did some excellent marquetry for the choir stalls of Santa Maria Novella in the principal chapel containing a Saint John the Baptist and a Saint Lawrence". These connections apply also to Jacopo Barozzi (il Vignola):
Nature inclined him so powerfully to architecture and perspective that he learned the elements almost unaided and speedily mastered the difficulties. Thus almost before he became known we saw fanciful designs by him....These designs were afterwards executed in marquetry of coloured woods by Fra Damiano, a Dominican of Bologna.
Vasari reports that Alberti "made a discovery for representing landscapes" and also invented a type of pantograph "for diminishing and enlarging figures by means of an instrument, all good inventions useful to art". Nothing is said of the perspective veil which was probably invented by Brunelleschi and which Alberti claims to have invented in the Latin edition of his On Painting; nor of various instruments developed by Leonardo da Vinci or by Dürer and his followers in the Nürnberg school. On the other hand, Vasari devotes a surprising amount of attention to the use of mirrors in art. The earliest reference is in connection with a portrait of Cimabue by the hand of Simone of Siena: "the one beside him is Simone himself, the author of the work, who drew himself with the aid of two mirrors placed opposite each other, to enable him to draw his head in profile".
In the introduction to part two, Vasari uses the simile of "history as the mirror of human life", and a few pages later, reports that Luca della Robbia (1397-1482) made "his portrait with his own hand, executed with great diligence with the aid of a mirror". Parri Spinelli (1387-1452) took this principle further in a fresco of the Blessed Tommasuolo:
As this man habitually carried in his hand a mirror in which as he affirmed, he saw the Passion of Jesus Christ, Parri drew him kneeling with the mirror in his hand, holding it up to heaven. Above, on a throne of clouds, is Jesus Christ surrounded by all the mysteries of the passion, everything being reflected in the mirror with exquisite art, so that not only the Blessed Tommasuolo, but anyone who looks at the picture may see it. It was certainly a charming and ingenious idea and it has taught succeeding artists to use mirrors in a similar fashion for many things.
Vasari reports that in the Brancacci Chapel, in the fresco of the Tribute Money, Masaccio: "painted his own portrait, with the aid of a mirror, in the guise of an Apostle, standing at the end and so well done that it is like life". Alberti too is said to have made a portrait of himself "done with a mirror", which was at the time in the home of Palla Rucellai in Florence. In his great fresco series at Prato we are told that Filippo Lippi: "drew his own portrait with the aid of a mirror, clothed in black with a prelate's habit, together with his pupil, Fra Diamante, in the scene of the mourning for Saint Stephen". When Gentile Bellini was invited to paint his own portrait by the Ottoman Emperor in Constantinople we are told that in a few days he: "made a wonderful likeness of himself with the aid of a mirror. When the portrait was shown to the prince he was amazed, feeling convinced that the artist had been assisted by some divine spirit and if such things had not been forbidden among the Turks by their laws, he would never have allowed the gentile to go".
In the Tornabuoni Chapel of Santa Maria Novella in Florence, Domenico Ghirlandaio painted Joachim being Driven from the Temple, which contained four portraits, one, Alesso Baldovinetti: "another, standing bareheaded, his hand at his side, in a red mantle with a blue vest beneath, is Domenico himself, drawn with the help of a mirror". Vasari mentions in passing that Leonardo da Vinci "studied mirrors". He reports that Giorgione resorted to a mirror while in a debate concerning the values of painting over sculpture:
He painted a nude figure turning its back; at its feet was a limpid fount of water, the reflection from which showed the front. On one side was a burnished corselet which had been taken off, and gave a side view, because the shining metal reflected everything. On the other side was a looking glass, showing the other side of the figure, a beautiful and ingenious work to prove that painting demands more skill and pains, and shows to a single view more than sculpture does.
Vasari reports that Pietro Soderini commissioned Fra Bartolommeo to do a picture of the Florentine council chamber which went to the chapel of Ottaviano de'Medici in San Lorenzo, and also contained a "portrait of Fra Bartolommeo himself, done with the aid of a mirror". In the famous School of Athens in the Stanze of the Vatican we are told that beside a portrait of Zoroaster "is Raphael himself, done with the help of a mirror". Andrea del Sarto, shortly before he died, "as if divining that he was near his end, took a mirror and painted himself, making a fine portrait". In the life of Jacopo da Pontormo Vasari describes how: Another apprentice, Giovanni Antonio Lappoli of Arezzo, mentioned elsewhere, drew himself in a mirror while with Jacopo, who did not think the likeness good and drew an admirable portrait of him himself".
While Sodoma was painting the cycle of Saint Benedict at Monte Oliveto Maggiore, the cloak of a Milanese nobleman who entered the order, was given to him and he: "drew himself in it with the help of a looking glass, and introduced the portrait in the the scene where Saint Benedict as a child repairs the broken sieve of his nurse, with a raven, a baboon, and other animals at his feet". Daniello Ricciarelli of Volterra, in his cycle of Saint Helena in the church of the Trinità in Rome depicted Michelangelo "looking at himself in a mirror". And Domenico Lampsonio, in a letter to Vasari cited in the Lives, wrote: "To show my gratitude to you for having taught me a beautiful language and the art of painting, I would send you a small portrait of myself done at a mirror".
Had Vasari recorded only one of these cases, the use of a mirror might readily have been dismissed as an anomaly. Instead his numerous examples include many of the greatest artists of the Renaissance: Masaccio, Gentile Bellini, Filippo Lippi, Ghirlandaio, Leonardo, Giorgione, Raphael and Andrea del Sarto. Since these were also the key artists in the development of Renaissance portraiture, the mirror must have played a major role in these developments. Indeed there is reason to believe that the mirror dominated the Italian scene in the early period, which helps to explain why the perspectival window (or veil), when it became popular in the latter sixteenth century was known as a Dürer window.
In addition to plane mirrors mentioned thus far, there was also some interest in reflections from convex surfaces, as in the case of Raphael's portrait of Pope Leo X, which had: "the burnished gold ball of the seat, reflecting, such is its clearness, the lights of the windows, the Pope's back, and the furniture of the room like a mirror, so wonderfully done that no master can improve upon it".
A similar effect is recorded in Sodoma's Deposition from the Cross (Siena), which has "an armed man turning his back, his face being reflected in a polished helmet lying on the ground". There is also a reference in the life of Mariotto Albertinelli to: "an oil painting on a sphere coloured like a miniature, on which Adam and Eve, naked, eating the apple, a very careful work", which has been interpreted as indicating a picture painted on a (spherical) mirror.
In his life of Taddeo Zuccaro, Vasari records a special case of anamorphosis. The painting was about two and a half braccia high and from an ordinary standpoint seemed to contain nothing but some letters on scarlet ground: "But on standing below the picture, and looking into a sphere or mirror placed above it like a canopy, one sees a portrait of King Henry II of France rather larger than life-size, with the words Henry II, Roy de France". Vasari is not aware that a similar painting had been made of King Francis I of France and that the invention of the technique has been associated with Leonardo da Vinci. In his life of Francesco Mazzuoli (1504-1540) a concave mirror is also discussed:
One day he began to paint himself with the help of a concave barber's mirror. Noticing the curious distortions of the buildings and doors caused by the mirror he conceived the idea of reproducing it all. Accordingly he had a ball of wood made, and cutting it out to make it of the same size and shape as the mirror he set to work to copy everything that he saw there, including his own likeness, in the most natural manner imaginable. As things near the mirror appear large while they diminish as they recede he made a hand with wonderful realism, somewhat large as the mirror showed it. Being a handsome man, with the face of an angel rather than a man, his reflection in this ball appeared divine. He was most successful with the lustre of his glass, the reflections, shadows and lights, in fact human ingenuity could go no farther.
Vasari recounts that it was given to the poet Pietro Aretino in Rome, came into the hands of Valerio Vincentino, a carver of crystals and then to Alessandro Vittoria, a Venetian sculptor and pupil of Jacopo Sansovino.
For our purposes, perhaps the most unexpected aspect of Vasari's Lives of the Artists is the wealth of material it contains concerning the oral transmission of perspective from teacher to student. Whether he is always accurate may be open to question. Even so he is our richest single source for insights into personal networks among Renaissance artists. At the outset many of the key individuals in perspective were members of a single workshop directed by Lorenzo Ghiberti who:
was assisted by many youths who afterwards became famous masters, such as Filippo Brunelleschi, Masolino da Panicale [whom experts now claim Vasari has confused with Maso di Cristofano], Niccolo Lamberti, goldsmiths, Parri Spinelli, Antonio Filarete, Paolo Uccello, Antonio del Pollaiuolo, then quite young and by many others who...by means of this association and mutual conference they benifited themselves no less than Lorenzo.
Elsewhere we are told that Donatello's brother, Simone, was also a member of this group and particularly friends with Filarete, whose work was a point of departure for Foppa. Some members taught each other. Masaccio, for instance, taught Brunelleschi "many points in perspective and architecture", and not conversely. Paolo Uccello, who was intimate friends with Donatello, often discussed problems of perspective with him. When Domenico Veneziano came to Florence, Piero della Francesca became his pupil. Vasari notes that Piero subsequently influenced Melozzo da Forli.
The head of another of the workshops, Verrocchio, taught both Leonardo da Vinci and Perugino. Leonardo, besides being friends with Baccio Bandinelli, taught Giovan Francesco Rustico. Perugino taught Benedetto Caporali (Bitti), remembered for his edition of Vitruvius (1536). Bramante taught Raphael, whose student Fra Bartolommeo, also studied the work of Leonardo. In the field of marquetry (see above 8) Francione taught both Giuliano and Antonio da San Gallo. Baldassare Peruzzi was able to study perspective partially through the aid of his friend, Agostino Chigi, and had several pupils: Jacopo Melighini of Ferrara, Francesco da Siena, Virgilio, Giovanni Battista Peloro and Sebastiano Serlio, who inherited many of Baldassare's notes and drawings. Jacopo Melighini, along with Primaticcio, went on to become a teacher of Jacopo Barozzi (Il Vignola), who taught the Dominican friar, Fra Damiano.
Niccolo Soggi taught Domenico Giuntalocchi. Perugino taught Girolamo Genga, who passed on his learning both to his son Bartolommeo Genga and to Baldassare Lancia of Urbino. Perugino, along with Bramante, Ridolfo Ghirlandaio and Giovanni Francesco da San Gallo, was also among the teachers of Bastiano (Aristotile ) da San Gallo.
In Lombardy, Butinone had a pupil, Bramantino (Bartolommeo Suardi), who became one of the teachers of Bramante, who in turn taught Bernardino Zenale. Bramantino, moreover, became a member a group including Luca Signorelli, Bernardino Pinturicchio, and Cesare Cesariano, with whom Jacopo Sansovino established close relations. Sansovino also had connections with Daniele Barbaro for whom he built a house. The painting of this house was done by Paolo Veronese, whose teacher had been Giovanni Caroto of Verona. In Venice, Titian influenced Paris Bordone.
Francesco, called De'Salviati had several teachers: his cousin, Diaceto; Baccio Bandinelli and Giuliano Bugiardini, as well as being friends with Vasari who, as a student of Michelangelo along with Andrea del Sarto, secretly supplied Francesco with his master's drawings.
Vasari's Lives is the richest single source for historical notes and anecdotes about Renaissance perspective. Sometimes he provides a wealth of information without exploring its implications. For instance he tells us that the artists who were goldsmiths included: Ghiberti, Masolino, Brunelleschi, Ghirlandaio, Antonio Pollaiuolo, Botticelli, Verrocchio, Francia, Piero di Cosimo, Mariotto Albertinelli, Lorenzo di Credi, Andrea del Sarto, Piloto, Beccafumi, Baccio Bandinelli, Diaceto, and Taddeo Zucchero. These, as we have seen, were among the most famous masters of Renaissance perspective. Yet, other than mentioning in passing that Piloto made a ball with 72 faces, i.e. a polyhedron of the type studied in perspective, Vasari makes no comment about possible links between the activities of goldsmiths and perspectivists.
While Vasari refers to Alberti, Piero della Francesca and Dürer in terms of treatises on perspective, he mentions none of the works by name, nor does he give any indication how widespread were manuscript copies thereof. Technical details of Brunelleschi's perspectival demonstrations are not given. No clue is given concerning the variety of alternative perspectival methods to which his contemporary Barbaro alludes. Similarly, no technical details are given about scenography with respect to perspective. Nor are we given any hint of the importance of marquetry: for instance, that there were over 70 workshops in Florence alone in the 1470's. Even the famous cases which Vasari does cite, such as Verona, Monte Oliveto Maggiore, Pisa and Rome, are only mentioned in passing, with hardly any description of contents or meanings.
As critics have noted Vasari's description of events is largely Tuscano-centric, although as we have seen, Rome is given due praise, Hence, the importance of Milan, Venice, Padua, Ferrara, Mantua, Urbino and Sansepolcro is given short shrift. The significance of Nürnberg as a centre for perspective and perspectival instruments is not considered. The role of Paris, Lyon, Antwerp is not discussed. The sketchbooks of Bellini, the perspectival writings of Filarete, Francesco di Giorgio Martini, Leonardo da Vinci, Gauricus, Pélerin, Rodler, Hirschvogel, Barozzi (il Vignola), Thierry, and Androuet Du Cerceau are not even mentioned. The publications of Serlio are not recorded.
From the above an intriguing picture emerges. Although Vasari's Lives is a published account, it depicts a community in which oral communication is the primary means of communication. Most of his stories appear to be based on hearsay. Some reports, as in the case of Northern artists, are clearly based on personal correspondence. Yet there are effectively no citations from printed books or even manuscripts and hence there are no footnotes in a modern sense. And while occasional reference is made to written treatises, Vasari gives us no sense of the ways in which printed knowledge after Gutenberg competed with or even replaced manuscript and oral traditions of learning. This helps to explain why his facts are sometimes confused and occasionally quite mistaken. In retrospect, it is easy to note such shortcomings and tempting to dwell on them and thereby overlook his contributions.
Vasari's account is invaluable precisely because it gives us an inside view into the personal networks of the Renaisaance. He reveals to us that perspective was not simply an artistic phenomenon; that it was intimately involved with architecture, and specifically with the measurement and study of ancient monuments and ruins, especially but not exclusively in Rome; that it was linked with the professions of sculpture, goldsmithing; that it was closely linked with scenography and the production of triumphal entries; that it involved the use of instruments. Vasari's account outlines a subtle shift in concerns with strict mastery of space through linear perspective to an interest in effects of colour, aerial and disappearance of form perspective; hence how effects of perspective and relief become increasingly intertwined. Many of the names and a great number of anecdotes that Vasari cites are available from no other source. Whence the Lives remains such an important source and why it is all the more surprising that a systematic examination of its contents has not occurred earlier.
Last Update: August 4, 1998