Chapter 11

FOOTNOTES:[i1]Vasari, Vite de Pittori, edit. Della Valle, 8vo. Siena 1792, vol. v. p. 22. Du Fresne, in the life prefixed to the Italian editions of this Treatise on Painting. Venturi, Essai sur les Ouvrages de Leonard de Vinci, 4to. Paris, 1797, p. 3, 36.[i2]Venturi, p. 3.[i3]Vasari, 23.[i4]Du Fresne.[i5]Du Fresne. Vasari, 25.[i6]Vasari, 26. Du Fresne.[i7]Du Fresne.[i8]Vasari, 26.[i9]Vasari, 28.[i10]Du Fresne. Vasari, 28.[i11]Du Fresne. Vasari, 28.[i12]Vasari, 28.[i13]It is impossible in a translation to preserve the jingle between the name Vinci, and the Latin verbvincitwhich occurs in the original.[i14]Du Fresne, Vasari, 28.[i15]Vasari, 22.[i16]Vasari, 22 and 23.[i17]Lomazzo, Trattato della Pittura, p. 282.[i18]Vasari, 23. Du Fresne.[i19]Venturi, 37.[i20]Du Fresne.[i21]Venturi, 36.[i22]Du Fresne.[i23]Vasari, 30. Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 184.[i24]Venturi, 3.[i25]Suppl. to Life of L. da Vinci, in Vasari, 65. Du Fresne.[i26]Venturi, 36; who mentions also, that Leonardo at this time constructed a machine for the theatre.[i27]Venturi, p. 44.[i28]Suppl. in Vasari, 74.[i29]Suppl. in Vasari, 63.[i30]Du Fresne.[i31]Du Fresne.[i32]De Piles, in the Life of Leonardo. See Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 187.[i33]Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 187.[i34]Du Fresne. Lettere Pitt. vol. ii. p. 186.[i35]Vasari, 31, in a note.[i36]Let. Pit. vol. ii. 183.[i37]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 53. My worthy friend, Mr. Rigaud, who has more than once seen the original picture, gives this account of it: “The cutting of the wall for the sake of opening a door, was no doubt the effect of ignorance and barbarity, but it did not materially injure the painting; it only took away some of the feet under the table, entirely shaded. The true value of this picture consists in what was seen above the table. The door is only four feet wide, and cuts off only about two feet of the lower part of the picture. More damage has been done by subsequent quacks, who, within my own time, have undertaken to repair it.”[i38]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 53.[i39]COPIES EXISTING IN MILAN OR ELSEWHERE.No. 1. That in the refectory of the fathers Osservanti della Pace: it was painted on the wall in 1561, by Gio. Paolo Lomazzo.2. Another, copied on board, as a picture in the refectory of the Chierici Regolari di S. Paolo, in their college of St. Barnabas. This is perhaps the most beautiful that can be seen, only that it is not finished lower than the knees, and is in size about one eighth of the original.3. Another on canvas, which was first in the church of S. Fedele, by Agostino S. Agostino, for the refectory of the Jesuits: since their suppression, it exists in that of the Orfani a S. Pietro, in Gessate.4. Another of the said Lomazzo’s, painted on the wall in the monastery Maggiore, very fine, and in good preservation.5. Another on canvas, by an uncertain artist, with only the heads and half the bodies, in the Ambrosian library.6. Another in the Certosa di Pavia, done by Marco d’Ogionno, a scholar of Leonardo’s, on the wall.7. Another in the possession of the monks Girolamini di Castellazzo fuori di Porta Lodovica, of the hand of the same Ogionno.8. Another copy of this Last Supper in the refectory of the fathers of St. Benedict of Mantua. It was painted by Girolamo Monsignori, a Dominican friar, who studied much the works of Leonardo, and copied them excellently.9. Another in the refectory of the fathers Osservanti di Lugano, of the hand of Bernardino Lovino; a valuable work, and much esteemed as well for its neatness and perfect imitation of the original, as for its own integrity, and being done by a scholar of Leonardo’s.10. A beautiful drawing of this famous picture is, or was lately, in the possession of Sig. Giuseppe Casati, king at arms. Supposed to be either the original design by Leonardo himself, or a sketch by one of his best scholars, to be used in painting some copy on a wall, or on canvas. It is drawn with a pen, on paper larger than usual, with a mere outline heightened with bistre.11. Another in the refectory of the fathers Girolamini, in the monastery of St. Laurence, in the Escurial in Spain. It was presented to King Philip II. while he was in Valentia; and by his order placed in the said room where the monks dine, and is believed to be by some able scholar of Leonardo.12. Another in St. Germain d’Auxerre, in France; ordered by King Francis I. when he came to Milan, and found he could not remove the original. There is reason to think this the work of Bernardino Lovino.13. Another in France, in the castle of Escovens, in the possession of the Constable Montmorency.The original drawing for this picture is in the possession of his Britannic Majesty. See the life prefixed to Mr. Chamberlaine’s publication of the Designs of Leonardo da Vinci, p. 5. An engraving from it is among those which Mr. Rogers published from drawings.[i40]Vasari, 34. Du Fresne.[i41]Du Fresne.[i42]Vasari, 36. Du Fresne.[i43]Vasari, 37. Du Fresne.[i44]Du Fresne.[i45]Suppl. in Vasari, 64.[i46]Du Fresne.[i47]Suppl. in Vasari, 75, 76, 77, 78.[i48]Vasari, 38. Du Fresne.[i49]Du Fresne.[i50]Du Fresne.[i51]Vasari, 39. Du Fresne.[i52]Vasari, 39. Du Fresne.[i53]Vasari, 39. Du Fresne.[i54]Du Fresne.[i55]Supp. in Vasari, 81.[i56]Suppl. in Vasari, 68.[i57]Vasari, 42. Du Fresne.[i58]Du Fresne.[i59]Du Fresne.[i60]Venturi, 37.[i61]Du Fresne.[i62]Venturi, 37.[i63]Venturi, 38.[i64]Venturi, 37.[i65]Du Fresne.[i66]Venturi, 38.[i67]Venturi, 38.[i68]Du Fresne.[i69]Vasari, 44. Du Fresne.[i70]Vasari, 44. Du Fresne.[i71]Du Fresne.[i72]Suppl. in Vasari, 79, 80.[i73]Suppl. in Vasari, 80.[i74]Suppl. in Vasari, 65.[i75]Vasari, 45. Du Fresne.[i76]Venturi, 39. Suppl. in Vasari, 80.[i77]Venturi, p. 4.[i78]Sect. 1. Of the Descent of heavy Bodies, combined with the Rotation of the Earth. 2. Of the Earth divided into Particles. 3. Of the Earth and the Moon. 4. Of the Action of the Sun on the Sea. 5. Of the ancient State of the Earth. 6. Of the Flame and the Air. 7. Of Statics. 8. Of the Descent of heavy Bodies by inclined Planes. 9. Of the Water which one draws from a Canal. 10. Of Whirlpools. 11. Of Vision. 12. Of military Architecture. 13. Of some Instruments. 14. Two chymical Processes. 15. Of Method.[i79]See the Life prefixed to Mr. Chamberlaine’s publication of the Designs of Leonardo da Vinci, p. 11.[i80]Fac similes of some of the pages of the original work, are also to be found in this publication.[i81]P. 33.[i82]“J. A. Mazenta died in 1635. He gave the designs for the fortifications of Livorno in Tuscany; and has written on the method of rendering the Adda navigable. Argelati Script. Mediol. vol. ii.” Venturi, 33.[i83]“We shall see afterwards that this man was Leonardo’s heir: he had carried back these writings and drawings from France to Milan.” Venturi, 34.[i84]“This was in 1587.” Venturi, p. 34.[i85]“J. Amb. Mazenta made himself a Barnabite in 1590.” Venturi, 34.[i86]“The drawings and books of Vinci are come for the most part into the hands of Pompeo Leoni, who has obtained them from the son of Francisco Melzo. There are some also of these books in the possession of Guy Mazenta Lomazzo, Tempio della Pittura, in 4º, Milano 1590, page 17.” Venturi, 35.[i87]“It is volume C. There is printed on it in gold,Vidi Mazenta Patritii Mediolanensis liberalitate An. 1603.” Venturi, 35.[i88]“He died in 1613.” Venturi, 35.[i89]“This is volume N, in the National Library. It is in folio, of a large size, and has 392 leaves: it bears on the cover this title:Disegni di Macchine delle Arti secreti et altre Cose di Leonardo da Vinci, raccolte da Pompeo Leoni.” Venturi, 35.[i90]P. 36.[i91]“A memorial is preserved of this liberality by an inscription.” Venturi, 36.[i92]“This is marked at p. 1 of the same volume.” Venturi, 36.[i93]Venturi, 36.[i94]“Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii.” Venturi, 36.[i95]P. 36. His authority is Gerli, Disegni del Vinci, Milano, 1784, fol.[i96]P. 42.[i97]It is said, that this compilation is now in the Albani library. Venturi, 42.[i98]The sketches to illustrate his meaning, were probably in Leonardo’s original manuscripts so slight as to require that more perfect drawings should be made from them before they could be fit for publication.[i99]The identical manuscript of this Treatise, formerly belonging to Mons. Chardin, one of the two copies from which the edition in Italian was printed, is now the property of Mr. Edwards of Pall Mall. Judging by the chapters as there numbered, it would appear to contain more than the printed edition; but this is merely owing to the circumstance that some of those which in the manuscript stand as distinct chapters, are in the printed edition consolidated together.[i100]Vasari, p. 37, gives the initials N. N.[i101]Which Venturi, p. 6, professes his intention of publishing from the manuscript collections of Leonardo.[i102]Bibliotheca Smithiana, 4to. Ven. 1755. Venturi, 44.[i103]Libreria Nani, 4to. Ven. 1776. Venturi, 44.[i104]Gori Simbolæ literar. Flor. 1751, vol. viii. p. 66. Venturi, 44.[i105]See his Traité des Pratiques Geometrales et Perspectives, 8vo. Paris, 1665.[i106]P. 128.[i107]P. 134.[i108]He observed criminals when led to execution (Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 182; on the authority of Lomazzo); noted down any countenance that struck him (Vasari, 29); in forming the animal for the shield, composed it of parts selected from different real animals (Vasari, p. 27); and when he wanted characteristic heads, resorted to Nature (Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 181). All which methods are recommended by him in the course of the Treatise on Painting.[i109]Du Fresne.[i110]Venturi, 35, in a note.[i111]Vasari, 23.[i112]Vasari, 24.[i113]Suppl. in Vasari, 67.[i114]Vasari, 23.[i115]Ibid.[i116]Vasari, 45.[i117]Additions to the life in Vasari, p. 47.[i118]Suppl. in Vasari, 74.[i119]Vasari, 24.[i120]Vasari, 26.[i121]Vasari, 29.[i122]Additions to the life in Vasari, 61.[i123]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 171.[i124]Vasari, 29.[i125]Ibid.[i126]Ibid.[i127]Venturi, 42.[i128]Vasari, 39. In a note in Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 174, on the before cited letter of Mariette, it is said that Bernardino Lovino was a scholar of Leonardo, and had in his possession the carton of St. Ann, which Leonardo had made for a picture which he was to paint in the church della Nunziata, at Florence. Francis I. got possession of it, and was desirous that Leonardo should execute it when he came into France, but without effect. It is known it was not done, as this carton went to Milan. Lomazzo, lib. ii. cap. 17. Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 174, in a note. A carton similar to this is now in the library of the Royal Academy, at London.[i129]Vasari, p. 39, in a note.[i130]Vasari, 41. In the suppl. to the life, Vasari, 68, the subject painted in the council-chamber at Florence is said to be the wonderful battle against Attila.[i131]Du Fresne. Vasari, 28.[i132]Du Fresne.[i133]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 48.[i134]Ibid.[i135]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 60.[i136]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 198.[i137]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 200.[i138]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 68.[i139]Ibid.[i140]Ibid.[i141]Ibid.[i142]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 198.[i143]Vasari, 28.[i144]The Datary is the Pope’s officer who nominates to vacant benefices.[i145]Vasari, 44.[i146]Du Fresne.[i147]Du Fresne. Additions in Vasari, 60.[i148]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 196.[i149]Du Fresne.[i150]Du Fresne. Additions to Vasari, 60.[i151]Additions to Vasari, 59.[i152]Additions to Vasari, 60.[i153]Additions to Vasari, 60.[i154]Additions in Vasari, 61.[i155]Suppl. in Vasari, 68.[i156]Du Fresne.[i157]Additions to Vasari, 59.[i158]Vasari, 25.[i159]Vasari, 28.[i160]Vasari, 29.[i161]Vasari, 30. In p. 29, it is said in a note, that there is in the Medici gallery an Adoration of the Magi, by Leonardo, unfinished, which may probably be the picture of which Vasari speaks.[i162]Vasari, 30.[i163]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 184. The real fact is known to be, that it was engraven from a drawing made by Rubens himself, who, as I am informed, had in it altered the back-ground.[i164]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 195.[i165]Vasari, 30.[i166]Vasari, 33.[i167]Venturi, 4.[i168]Venturi, 37.[i169]Suppl. in Vasari, 68.[i170]Vasari, 39.[i171]Ibid.[i172]Suppl. in Vasari, 60.[i173]Vasari, 44.[i174]Du Fresne.[i175]Du Fresne.[i176]Suppl. in Vasari, 61.[i177]Ibid. 81.[i178]Du Fresne.[i179]Du Fresne. Add. to the Life in Vasari, 60.[i180]Suppl. in Vasari, 69.[i181]Du Fresne. Add. to Vasari, 60.[i182]Du Fresne.[i183]Add. in Vasari, 47.[i184]Add. to Vasari, 48.[i185]Add. in Vasari, 57.[i186]Add. to Vasari, 58.[i187]Add. to Vasari, 59.[i188]Ibid.[i189]Ibid. This is the picture lately exhibited in Brook Street, Grosvenor Square, and is said to have been purchased by the Earl of Warwick.[i190]Add. to Vasari, 59.[i191]Ibid.[i192]Ibid.[i193]Ibid.[i194]Ibid. 60.[i195]Ibid.[i196]Ibid.[i197]Ibid.[i198]Ibid.[i199]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 197.[i200]Add. in Vasari, 60.[i201]Add. in Vasari, 61.[i202]Ibid.[i203]Ibid.[i204]Ibid.[i205]Supp. in Vasari, 67.[i206]Ibid. 68.[i207]Supp. in Vasari, 75.[i208]Ibid.[i209]Supp. in Vasari, 80.[i210]Supp. in Vasari, 81.[1]This passage has been by some persons much misunderstood, and supposed to require, that the student should be a deep proficient in perspective, before he commences the study of painting; but it is a knowledge of the leading principles only of perspective that the author here means, and without such a knowledge, which is easily to be acquired, the student will inevitably fall into errors, as gross as those humorously pointed out by Hogarth, in his Frontispiece to Kirby’s Perspective.[2]See Chap. 351.[3]Not to be found in this work.[4]From this, and many other similar passages, it is evident, that the author intended at some future time to arrange his manuscript collections, and to publish them as separate treatises. That he did not do so is well known; but it is also a fact, that, in selecting from the whole mass of his collections the chapters of which the present work consists, great care appears in general to have been taken to extract also those to which there was any reference from any of the chapters intended for this work, or which from their subject were necessarily connected with them. Accordingly, the reader will find, in the notes to this translation, that all such chapters in any other part of the present work are uniformly pointed out, as have any relation to the respective passages in the text. This, which has never before been done, though indispensably necessary, will be found of singular use, and it was thought proper here, once for all, to notice it.In the present instance the chapters, referring to the subject in the text, are Chap. xvi. xvii. xviii. xix. xx. xxvi.; and though these do not afford complete information, yet it is to be remembered, that drawing from relievos is subject to the very same rules as drawing from Nature; and that, therefore, what is elsewhere said on that subject is also equally applicable to this.[5]The meaning of this is, that the last touches of light, such as the shining parts (which are always narrow), must be given sparingly. In short, that the drawing must be kept in broad masses as much as possible.[6]This is not an absolute rule, but it is a very good one for drawing of portraits.[7]See Chap. ci.[8]See the preceding chapter.[9]See the two preceding chapters.[10]Man being the highest of the animal creation, ought to be the chief object of study.[11]An intended Treatise, as it seems, on Anatomy, which however never was published; but there are several chapters in the present work on the subject of Anatomy, most of which will be found under the present head of Anatomy; and of such as could not be placed there, because they also related to some other branch, the following is a list by which they may be found: Chapters vi. vii. x. xi. xxxiv. xxxv. xxxvi. xxxvii. xxxviii. xxxix. xl. xli. xlii. xliii. xliv. xlv. xlvi. xlviii. xlix. l. li. lii. cxxix.[12]See chap. lxxxvii.[13]It does not appear that this intention was ever carried into execution; but there are many chapters in this work on the subject of motion, where all that is necessary for a painter in this branch will be found.[14]Anatomists have divided this muscle into four or five sections; but painters, following the ancient sculptors, shew only the three principal ones; and, in fact, we find that a greater number of them (as may often be observed in nature) gives a disagreeable meagreness to the subject. Beautiful nature does not shew more than three, though there may be more hid under the skin.[15]A treatise on weights, like many others, intended by this author, but never published.[16]See the next chapter.[17]It is believed that this treatise, like many others promised by the author, was never written; and to save the necessity of frequently repeating this fact, the reader is here informed, once for all, that in the life of the author prefixed to this edition, will be found an account of the works promised or projected by him, and how far his intentions have been carried into effect.[18]See chap. lxiv.[19]See in this work from chap. lx. to lxxxi.[20]See chapters lxi. lxiv.[21]See chapters civ. cliv.[22]The author here means to compare the different quickness of the motion of the head and the heel, when employed in the same action of jumping; and he states the proportion of the former to be three times that of the latter. The reason he gives for this is in substance, that as the head has but one motion to make, while in fact the lower part of the figure has three successive operations to perform at the places he mentions, three times the velocity, or, in other words, three times the degree of effort, is necessary in the head, the prime mover, to give the power of influencing the other parts; and the rule deducible from this axiom is, that where two different parts of the body concur in the same action, and one of them has to perform one motion only, while the other is to have several, the proportion of velocity or effort in the former must be regulated by the number of operations necessary in the latter.[23]It is explained in this work, or at least there is something respecting it in the preceding chapter, and in chap. cli.[24]The eyeball moving up and down to look at the hand, describes a part of a circle, from every point of which it sees it in an infinite variety of aspects. The hand also is moveablead infinitum(for it can go round the whole circle—see chap. lxxxvii.), and consequently shew itself in an infinite variety of aspects, which it is impossible for any memory to retain.[25]See chap. xx. clv.[26]About thirteen yards of our measure, the Florentine braccia, or cubit, by which the author measures, being 1 foot 10 inches 7-8ths English measure.[27]See chap. cxxi. and cccv.[28]It is supposed that the figures are to appear of the natural size, and not bigger. In that case, the measure of the first, to be of the exact dimension, should have its feet resting upon the bottom line; but as you remove it from that, it should diminish.No allusion is here intended to the distance at which a picture is to be placed from the eye.[29]The author does not mean here to say, that one historical picture cannot be hung over another. It certainly may, because, in viewing each, the spectator is at liberty (especially if they are subjects independent of each other) to shift his place so as to stand at the true point of sight for viewing every one of them; but in covering a wall with a succession of subjects from the same history, the author considers the whole as, in fact, but one picture, divided into compartments, and to be seen at one view, and which cannot therefore admit more than one point of sight. In the former case, the pictures are in fact so many distinct subjects unconnected with each other.[30]See chap. cccxlviii.This chapter is obscure, and may probably be made clear by merely stating it in other words. Leonardo objects to the use of both eyes, because, in viewing in that manner the objects here mentioned, two balls, one behind the other, the second is seen, which would not be the case, if the angle of the visual rays were not too big for the first object. Whoever is at all acquainted with optics, need not be told, that the visual rays commence in a single point in the centre, or nearly the centre of each eye, and continue diverging. But, in using both eyes, the visual rays proceed not from one and the same centre, but from a different centre in each eye, and intersecting each other, as they do a little before passing the first object, they become together broader than the extent of the first object, and consequently give a view of part of the second. On the contrary, in using but one eye, the visual rays proceed but from one centre; and as, therefore, there cannot be any intersection, the visual rays, when they reach the first object, are not broader than the first object, and the second is completely hidden. Properly speaking, therefore, in using both eyes we introduce more than one point of sight, which renders the perspective false in the painting; but in using one eye only, there can be, as there ought, but one point of sight. There is, however, this difference between viewing real objects and those represented in painting, that in looking at the former, whether we use one or both eyes, the objects, by being actually detached from the back ground, admit the visual rays to strike on them, so as to form a correct perspective, from whatever point they are viewed, and the eye accordingly forms a perspective of its own; but in viewing the latter, there is no possibility of varying the perspective; and, unless the picture is seen precisely under the same angle as it was painted under, the perspective in all other views must be false. This is observable in the perspective views painted for scenes at the playhouse. If the beholder is seated in the central line of the house, whether in the boxes or pit, the perspective is correct; but, in proportion as he is placed at a greater or less distance to the right or left of that line, the perspective appears to him more or less faulty. And hence arises the necessity of using but one eye in viewing a painting, in order thereby to reduce it to one point of sight.[31]Chap. xcvi. and civ.[32]See the Life of the Author prefixed, and chap. xx. and ci. of the present work.[33]The author here speaks of unpolished Nature; and indeed it is from such subjects only, that the genuine and characteristic operations of Nature are to be learnt. It is the effect of education to correct the natural peculiarities and defects, and, by so doing, to assimilate one person to the rest of the world.[34]See chap. cxxiii.[35]See chap. cclxiv.[36]See chapter cclxvii.[37]Sir Joshua Reynolds frequently inculcated these precepts in his lectures, and indeed they cannot be too often enforced.[38]Probably this would have formed a part of his intended Treatise on Light and Shadow, but no such proposition occurs in the present work.[39]See chapters cc. and ccix.[40]See chap. ccix.[41]This cannot be taken as an absolute rule; it must be left in a great measure to the judgment of the painter. For much graceful softness and grandeur is acquired, sometimes, by blending the lights of the figures with the light part of the ground; and so of the shadows; as Leonardo himself has observed in chapters cxciv. cxcv. and Sir Joshua Reynolds has often put in practice with success.[42]See chap. cclxv.[43]See chap. cxcvi.[44]He means here to say, that in proportion as the body interposed between the eye and the object is more or less transparent, the greater or less quantity of the colour of the body interposed will be communicated to the object.[45]See the note to chap. cc.[46]See the preceding chapter, and chap. cc.[47]The appearance of motion is lessened according to the distance, in the same proportion as objects diminish in size.[48]See chap. ccxvii. and ccxix.[49]See chap. ccxv. and ccxix.[50]This was intended to constitute a part of some book of Perspective, which we have not; but the rule here referred to will be found in chap. cccx. of the present work.[51]See chap. ccxv. and ccxvii.[52]No such work was ever published, nor, for any thing that appears, ever written.[53]The French translation of 1716 has a note on this chapter, saying, that the invention of enamel painting found out since the time of Leonardo da Vinci, would better answer to the title of this chapter, and also be a better method of painting. I must beg leave, however, to dissent from this opinion, as the two kinds of painting are so different, that they cannot be compared. Leonardo treats of oil painting, but the other is vitrification. Leonardo is known to have spent a great deal of time in experiments, of which this is a specimen, and it may appear ridiculous to the practitioners of more modern date, as he does not enter more fully into a minute description of the materials, or the mode of employing them. The principle laid down in the text appears to me to be simply this: to make the oil entirely evaporate from the colours by the action of fire, and afterwards to prevent the action of the air by the means of a glass, which in itself is an excellent principle, but not applicable, any more than enamel painting to large works.[54]It is evident that distemper or size painting is here meant.[55]Indian ink.[56]This rule is not without exception: see chap. ccxxxiv.[57]See chap. ccxxxviii.[58]See chap. ccxxxvii.[59]See chapters ccxlvii. cclxxiv. in the present work. Probably they were intended to form a part of a distinct treatise, and to have been ranged as propositions in that, but at present they are not so placed.[60]See chap. ccxlviii.[61]See chap. cclxxiv.[62]Although the author seems to have designed that this, and many other propositions to which he refers, should have formed a part of some regular work, and he has accordingly referred to them whenever he has mentioned them, by their intended numerical situation in that work, whatever it might be, it does not appear that he ever carried this design into execution. There are, however, several chapters in the present work, viz. ccxciii. cclxxxix. cclxxxv. ccxcv. in which the principle in the text is recognised, and which probably would have been transferred into the projected treatise, if he had ever drawn it up.[63]The note on the preceding chapter is in a great measure applicable to this, and the proposition mentioned in the text is also to be found in chapter ccxlvii. of the present work.[64]See the note on the chapter next but one preceding. The proposition in the text occurs in chap. ccxlvii. of the present work.[65]Not in this work.[66]I do not know a better comment on this passage than Felibien’s Examination of Le Brun’s Picture of the Tent of Darius. From this (which has been reprinted with an English translation, by Colonel Parsons in 1700, in folio) it will clearly appear, what the chain of connexion is between every colour there used, and its nearest neighbour, and consequently a rule may be formed from it with more certainty and precision than where the student is left to develope it for himself, from the mere inspection of different examples of colouring.[67]See chap. ccxxiii. ccxxxvii. cclxxiv. cclxxxii. of the present work. We have before remarked, that the propositions so frequently referred to by the author, were never reduced into form, though apparently he intended a regular work in which they were to be included.[68]No where in this work.[69]This is evident in many of Vandyke’s portraits, particularly of ladies, many of whom are dressed in black velvet; and this remark will in some measure account for the delicate fairness which he frequently gives to the female complexion.[70]These propositions, any more than the others mentioned in different parts of this work, were never digested into a regular treatise, as was evidently intended by the author, and consequently are not to be found, except perhaps in some of the volumes of the author’s manuscript collections.[71]See chap. ccxciii. cccvii. cccviii.[72]See chap. cclxxxvii.[73]This book on perspective was never drawn up.[74]See chap. ccxcii.[75]See chap. ccxii. ccxlviii. cclv.[76]There is no work of this author to which this can at present refer, but the principle is laid down in chapters cclxxxiv. cccvi. of the present treatise.[77]See chapters cccvii. cccxxii.[78]See chap. cxvi. cxxi. cccv.[79]See chap. cccxiii. and cccxxiii.[80]To our obtaining a correct idea of the magnitude and distance of any object seen from afar, it is necessary that we consider how much of distinctness an object loses at a distance (from the mere interposition of the air), as well as what it loses in size; and these two considerations must unite before we can decidedly pronounce as to its distance or magnitude. This calculation, as to distinctness, must be made upon the idea that the air is clear, as, if by any accident it is otherwise, we shall (knowing the proportion in which clear air dims a prospect) be led to conclude this farther off than it is, and, to justify that conclusion, shall suppose its real magnitude correspondent with the distance, at which from its degree of distinctness it appears to be. In the circumstance remarked in the text there is, however, a great deception; the fact is, that the colour and the minute parts of the object are lost in the fog, while the size of it is not diminished in proportion; and the eye being accustomed to see objects diminished in size at a great distance, supposes this to be farther off than it is, and consequently imagines it larger.[81]This proposition, though undoubtedly intended to form a part of some future work, which never was drawn up, makes no part of the present.[82]See chap. cccvii.[83]Vide chap. ccxcii. ccciii.[84]See chapter ccxcviii.[85]This was probably to have been a part of some other work, but it does not occur in this.[86]Cento braccia, or cubits. The Florence braccio is one foot ten inches seven eighths, English measure.[87]Probably the Author here means yellow lilies, or fleurs de lis.[88]That point is always found in the horizon, and is called the point of sight, or the vanishing point.[89]See chap. cccxx.[90]See chap. cccxvii.[91]This position has been already laid down in chapter cxxiv. (and will also be found in chapter cccxlviii.); and the reader is referred to the note on that passage, which will also explain that in the text, for further illustration. It may, however, be proper to remark, that though the author has here supposed both objects conveyed to the eye by an angle of the same extent, they cannot, in fact, be so seen, unless one eye be shut; and the reason is this: if viewed with both eyes, there will be two points of sight, one in the centre of each eye; and the rays from each of these to the objects must of course be different, and will consequently form different angles.[92]The braccio is one foot ten inches and seven eighths English measure.[93]i.e. To be abridged according to the rules of perspective.[94]See chap. cxxii.[95]The whole of this chapter, like the next but one preceding, depends on the circumstance of there being in fact two points of sight, one in the centre of each eye, when an object is viewed with both eyes. In natural objects the effect which this circumstance produces is, that the rays from each point of sight, diverging as they extend towards the object, take in not only that, but some part also of the distance behind it, till at length, at a certain distance behind it, they cross each other; whereas, in a painted representation, there being no real distance behind the object, but the whole being a flat surface, it is impossible that the rays from the points of sight should pass beyond that flat surface; and as the object itself is on that flat surface, which is the real extremity of the view, the eyes cannot acquire a sight of any thing beyond.[96]A well-known painter at Florence, contemporary with Leonardo da Vinci, who painted several altar-pieces and other public works.[97]See chap. cxxiv. and cccxlviii.[98]See chap. x.[99]See chap. cci.[100]Leonardo da Vinci was remarkably fond of this kind of invention, and is accused of having lost a great deal of time that way.[101]The method here recommended, was the general and common practice at that time, and continued so with little, if any variation, till lately. But about thirty years ago, the late Mr. Bacon invented an entirely new method, which, as better answering the purpose, he constantly used, and from him others have also adopted it into practice.[102]This may be a good method of dividing the figure for the purpose of reducing from large to small, orvice versâ; but it not being the method generally used by the painters for measuring their figures, as being too minute, this chapter was not introduced amongst those of general proportions.

FOOTNOTES:

[i1]Vasari, Vite de Pittori, edit. Della Valle, 8vo. Siena 1792, vol. v. p. 22. Du Fresne, in the life prefixed to the Italian editions of this Treatise on Painting. Venturi, Essai sur les Ouvrages de Leonard de Vinci, 4to. Paris, 1797, p. 3, 36.

[i2]Venturi, p. 3.

[i3]Vasari, 23.

[i4]Du Fresne.

[i5]Du Fresne. Vasari, 25.

[i6]Vasari, 26. Du Fresne.

[i7]Du Fresne.

[i8]Vasari, 26.

[i9]Vasari, 28.

[i10]Du Fresne. Vasari, 28.

[i11]Du Fresne. Vasari, 28.

[i12]Vasari, 28.

[i13]It is impossible in a translation to preserve the jingle between the name Vinci, and the Latin verbvincitwhich occurs in the original.

[i14]Du Fresne, Vasari, 28.

[i15]Vasari, 22.

[i16]Vasari, 22 and 23.

[i17]Lomazzo, Trattato della Pittura, p. 282.

[i18]Vasari, 23. Du Fresne.

[i19]Venturi, 37.

[i20]Du Fresne.

[i21]Venturi, 36.

[i22]Du Fresne.

[i23]Vasari, 30. Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 184.

[i24]Venturi, 3.

[i25]Suppl. to Life of L. da Vinci, in Vasari, 65. Du Fresne.

[i26]Venturi, 36; who mentions also, that Leonardo at this time constructed a machine for the theatre.

[i27]Venturi, p. 44.

[i28]Suppl. in Vasari, 74.

[i29]Suppl. in Vasari, 63.

[i30]Du Fresne.

[i31]Du Fresne.

[i32]De Piles, in the Life of Leonardo. See Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 187.

[i33]Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 187.

[i34]Du Fresne. Lettere Pitt. vol. ii. p. 186.

[i35]Vasari, 31, in a note.

[i36]Let. Pit. vol. ii. 183.

[i37]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 53. My worthy friend, Mr. Rigaud, who has more than once seen the original picture, gives this account of it: “The cutting of the wall for the sake of opening a door, was no doubt the effect of ignorance and barbarity, but it did not materially injure the painting; it only took away some of the feet under the table, entirely shaded. The true value of this picture consists in what was seen above the table. The door is only four feet wide, and cuts off only about two feet of the lower part of the picture. More damage has been done by subsequent quacks, who, within my own time, have undertaken to repair it.”

[i38]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 53.

[i39]COPIES EXISTING IN MILAN OR ELSEWHERE.No. 1. That in the refectory of the fathers Osservanti della Pace: it was painted on the wall in 1561, by Gio. Paolo Lomazzo.2. Another, copied on board, as a picture in the refectory of the Chierici Regolari di S. Paolo, in their college of St. Barnabas. This is perhaps the most beautiful that can be seen, only that it is not finished lower than the knees, and is in size about one eighth of the original.3. Another on canvas, which was first in the church of S. Fedele, by Agostino S. Agostino, for the refectory of the Jesuits: since their suppression, it exists in that of the Orfani a S. Pietro, in Gessate.4. Another of the said Lomazzo’s, painted on the wall in the monastery Maggiore, very fine, and in good preservation.5. Another on canvas, by an uncertain artist, with only the heads and half the bodies, in the Ambrosian library.6. Another in the Certosa di Pavia, done by Marco d’Ogionno, a scholar of Leonardo’s, on the wall.7. Another in the possession of the monks Girolamini di Castellazzo fuori di Porta Lodovica, of the hand of the same Ogionno.8. Another copy of this Last Supper in the refectory of the fathers of St. Benedict of Mantua. It was painted by Girolamo Monsignori, a Dominican friar, who studied much the works of Leonardo, and copied them excellently.9. Another in the refectory of the fathers Osservanti di Lugano, of the hand of Bernardino Lovino; a valuable work, and much esteemed as well for its neatness and perfect imitation of the original, as for its own integrity, and being done by a scholar of Leonardo’s.10. A beautiful drawing of this famous picture is, or was lately, in the possession of Sig. Giuseppe Casati, king at arms. Supposed to be either the original design by Leonardo himself, or a sketch by one of his best scholars, to be used in painting some copy on a wall, or on canvas. It is drawn with a pen, on paper larger than usual, with a mere outline heightened with bistre.11. Another in the refectory of the fathers Girolamini, in the monastery of St. Laurence, in the Escurial in Spain. It was presented to King Philip II. while he was in Valentia; and by his order placed in the said room where the monks dine, and is believed to be by some able scholar of Leonardo.12. Another in St. Germain d’Auxerre, in France; ordered by King Francis I. when he came to Milan, and found he could not remove the original. There is reason to think this the work of Bernardino Lovino.13. Another in France, in the castle of Escovens, in the possession of the Constable Montmorency.The original drawing for this picture is in the possession of his Britannic Majesty. See the life prefixed to Mr. Chamberlaine’s publication of the Designs of Leonardo da Vinci, p. 5. An engraving from it is among those which Mr. Rogers published from drawings.

[i39]COPIES EXISTING IN MILAN OR ELSEWHERE.

No. 1. That in the refectory of the fathers Osservanti della Pace: it was painted on the wall in 1561, by Gio. Paolo Lomazzo.

2. Another, copied on board, as a picture in the refectory of the Chierici Regolari di S. Paolo, in their college of St. Barnabas. This is perhaps the most beautiful that can be seen, only that it is not finished lower than the knees, and is in size about one eighth of the original.

3. Another on canvas, which was first in the church of S. Fedele, by Agostino S. Agostino, for the refectory of the Jesuits: since their suppression, it exists in that of the Orfani a S. Pietro, in Gessate.

4. Another of the said Lomazzo’s, painted on the wall in the monastery Maggiore, very fine, and in good preservation.

5. Another on canvas, by an uncertain artist, with only the heads and half the bodies, in the Ambrosian library.

6. Another in the Certosa di Pavia, done by Marco d’Ogionno, a scholar of Leonardo’s, on the wall.

7. Another in the possession of the monks Girolamini di Castellazzo fuori di Porta Lodovica, of the hand of the same Ogionno.

8. Another copy of this Last Supper in the refectory of the fathers of St. Benedict of Mantua. It was painted by Girolamo Monsignori, a Dominican friar, who studied much the works of Leonardo, and copied them excellently.

9. Another in the refectory of the fathers Osservanti di Lugano, of the hand of Bernardino Lovino; a valuable work, and much esteemed as well for its neatness and perfect imitation of the original, as for its own integrity, and being done by a scholar of Leonardo’s.

10. A beautiful drawing of this famous picture is, or was lately, in the possession of Sig. Giuseppe Casati, king at arms. Supposed to be either the original design by Leonardo himself, or a sketch by one of his best scholars, to be used in painting some copy on a wall, or on canvas. It is drawn with a pen, on paper larger than usual, with a mere outline heightened with bistre.

11. Another in the refectory of the fathers Girolamini, in the monastery of St. Laurence, in the Escurial in Spain. It was presented to King Philip II. while he was in Valentia; and by his order placed in the said room where the monks dine, and is believed to be by some able scholar of Leonardo.

12. Another in St. Germain d’Auxerre, in France; ordered by King Francis I. when he came to Milan, and found he could not remove the original. There is reason to think this the work of Bernardino Lovino.

13. Another in France, in the castle of Escovens, in the possession of the Constable Montmorency.

The original drawing for this picture is in the possession of his Britannic Majesty. See the life prefixed to Mr. Chamberlaine’s publication of the Designs of Leonardo da Vinci, p. 5. An engraving from it is among those which Mr. Rogers published from drawings.

[i40]Vasari, 34. Du Fresne.

[i41]Du Fresne.

[i42]Vasari, 36. Du Fresne.

[i43]Vasari, 37. Du Fresne.

[i44]Du Fresne.

[i45]Suppl. in Vasari, 64.

[i46]Du Fresne.

[i47]Suppl. in Vasari, 75, 76, 77, 78.

[i48]Vasari, 38. Du Fresne.

[i49]Du Fresne.

[i50]Du Fresne.

[i51]Vasari, 39. Du Fresne.

[i52]Vasari, 39. Du Fresne.

[i53]Vasari, 39. Du Fresne.

[i54]Du Fresne.

[i55]Supp. in Vasari, 81.

[i56]Suppl. in Vasari, 68.

[i57]Vasari, 42. Du Fresne.

[i58]Du Fresne.

[i59]Du Fresne.

[i60]Venturi, 37.

[i61]Du Fresne.

[i62]Venturi, 37.

[i63]Venturi, 38.

[i64]Venturi, 37.

[i65]Du Fresne.

[i66]Venturi, 38.

[i67]Venturi, 38.

[i68]Du Fresne.

[i69]Vasari, 44. Du Fresne.

[i70]Vasari, 44. Du Fresne.

[i71]Du Fresne.

[i72]Suppl. in Vasari, 79, 80.

[i73]Suppl. in Vasari, 80.

[i74]Suppl. in Vasari, 65.

[i75]Vasari, 45. Du Fresne.

[i76]Venturi, 39. Suppl. in Vasari, 80.

[i77]Venturi, p. 4.

[i78]Sect. 1. Of the Descent of heavy Bodies, combined with the Rotation of the Earth. 2. Of the Earth divided into Particles. 3. Of the Earth and the Moon. 4. Of the Action of the Sun on the Sea. 5. Of the ancient State of the Earth. 6. Of the Flame and the Air. 7. Of Statics. 8. Of the Descent of heavy Bodies by inclined Planes. 9. Of the Water which one draws from a Canal. 10. Of Whirlpools. 11. Of Vision. 12. Of military Architecture. 13. Of some Instruments. 14. Two chymical Processes. 15. Of Method.

[i79]See the Life prefixed to Mr. Chamberlaine’s publication of the Designs of Leonardo da Vinci, p. 11.

[i80]Fac similes of some of the pages of the original work, are also to be found in this publication.

[i81]P. 33.

[i82]“J. A. Mazenta died in 1635. He gave the designs for the fortifications of Livorno in Tuscany; and has written on the method of rendering the Adda navigable. Argelati Script. Mediol. vol. ii.” Venturi, 33.

[i83]“We shall see afterwards that this man was Leonardo’s heir: he had carried back these writings and drawings from France to Milan.” Venturi, 34.

[i84]“This was in 1587.” Venturi, p. 34.

[i85]“J. Amb. Mazenta made himself a Barnabite in 1590.” Venturi, 34.

[i86]“The drawings and books of Vinci are come for the most part into the hands of Pompeo Leoni, who has obtained them from the son of Francisco Melzo. There are some also of these books in the possession of Guy Mazenta Lomazzo, Tempio della Pittura, in 4º, Milano 1590, page 17.” Venturi, 35.

[i87]“It is volume C. There is printed on it in gold,Vidi Mazenta Patritii Mediolanensis liberalitate An. 1603.” Venturi, 35.

[i88]“He died in 1613.” Venturi, 35.

[i89]“This is volume N, in the National Library. It is in folio, of a large size, and has 392 leaves: it bears on the cover this title:Disegni di Macchine delle Arti secreti et altre Cose di Leonardo da Vinci, raccolte da Pompeo Leoni.” Venturi, 35.

[i90]P. 36.

[i91]“A memorial is preserved of this liberality by an inscription.” Venturi, 36.

[i92]“This is marked at p. 1 of the same volume.” Venturi, 36.

[i93]Venturi, 36.

[i94]“Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii.” Venturi, 36.

[i95]P. 36. His authority is Gerli, Disegni del Vinci, Milano, 1784, fol.

[i96]P. 42.

[i97]It is said, that this compilation is now in the Albani library. Venturi, 42.

[i98]The sketches to illustrate his meaning, were probably in Leonardo’s original manuscripts so slight as to require that more perfect drawings should be made from them before they could be fit for publication.

[i99]The identical manuscript of this Treatise, formerly belonging to Mons. Chardin, one of the two copies from which the edition in Italian was printed, is now the property of Mr. Edwards of Pall Mall. Judging by the chapters as there numbered, it would appear to contain more than the printed edition; but this is merely owing to the circumstance that some of those which in the manuscript stand as distinct chapters, are in the printed edition consolidated together.

[i100]Vasari, p. 37, gives the initials N. N.

[i101]Which Venturi, p. 6, professes his intention of publishing from the manuscript collections of Leonardo.

[i102]Bibliotheca Smithiana, 4to. Ven. 1755. Venturi, 44.

[i103]Libreria Nani, 4to. Ven. 1776. Venturi, 44.

[i104]Gori Simbolæ literar. Flor. 1751, vol. viii. p. 66. Venturi, 44.

[i105]See his Traité des Pratiques Geometrales et Perspectives, 8vo. Paris, 1665.

[i106]P. 128.

[i107]P. 134.

[i108]He observed criminals when led to execution (Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 182; on the authority of Lomazzo); noted down any countenance that struck him (Vasari, 29); in forming the animal for the shield, composed it of parts selected from different real animals (Vasari, p. 27); and when he wanted characteristic heads, resorted to Nature (Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 181). All which methods are recommended by him in the course of the Treatise on Painting.

[i109]Du Fresne.

[i110]Venturi, 35, in a note.

[i111]Vasari, 23.

[i112]Vasari, 24.

[i113]Suppl. in Vasari, 67.

[i114]Vasari, 23.

[i115]Ibid.

[i116]Vasari, 45.

[i117]Additions to the life in Vasari, p. 47.

[i118]Suppl. in Vasari, 74.

[i119]Vasari, 24.

[i120]Vasari, 26.

[i121]Vasari, 29.

[i122]Additions to the life in Vasari, 61.

[i123]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 171.

[i124]Vasari, 29.

[i125]Ibid.

[i126]Ibid.

[i127]Venturi, 42.

[i128]Vasari, 39. In a note in Lettere Pittoriche, vol. ii. p. 174, on the before cited letter of Mariette, it is said that Bernardino Lovino was a scholar of Leonardo, and had in his possession the carton of St. Ann, which Leonardo had made for a picture which he was to paint in the church della Nunziata, at Florence. Francis I. got possession of it, and was desirous that Leonardo should execute it when he came into France, but without effect. It is known it was not done, as this carton went to Milan. Lomazzo, lib. ii. cap. 17. Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 174, in a note. A carton similar to this is now in the library of the Royal Academy, at London.

[i129]Vasari, p. 39, in a note.

[i130]Vasari, 41. In the suppl. to the life, Vasari, 68, the subject painted in the council-chamber at Florence is said to be the wonderful battle against Attila.

[i131]Du Fresne. Vasari, 28.

[i132]Du Fresne.

[i133]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 48.

[i134]Ibid.

[i135]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 60.

[i136]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 198.

[i137]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. p. 200.

[i138]Additions to the Life in Vasari, 68.

[i139]Ibid.

[i140]Ibid.

[i141]Ibid.

[i142]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 198.

[i143]Vasari, 28.

[i144]The Datary is the Pope’s officer who nominates to vacant benefices.

[i145]Vasari, 44.

[i146]Du Fresne.

[i147]Du Fresne. Additions in Vasari, 60.

[i148]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 196.

[i149]Du Fresne.

[i150]Du Fresne. Additions to Vasari, 60.

[i151]Additions to Vasari, 59.

[i152]Additions to Vasari, 60.

[i153]Additions to Vasari, 60.

[i154]Additions in Vasari, 61.

[i155]Suppl. in Vasari, 68.

[i156]Du Fresne.

[i157]Additions to Vasari, 59.

[i158]Vasari, 25.

[i159]Vasari, 28.

[i160]Vasari, 29.

[i161]Vasari, 30. In p. 29, it is said in a note, that there is in the Medici gallery an Adoration of the Magi, by Leonardo, unfinished, which may probably be the picture of which Vasari speaks.

[i162]Vasari, 30.

[i163]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 184. The real fact is known to be, that it was engraven from a drawing made by Rubens himself, who, as I am informed, had in it altered the back-ground.

[i164]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 195.

[i165]Vasari, 30.

[i166]Vasari, 33.

[i167]Venturi, 4.

[i168]Venturi, 37.

[i169]Suppl. in Vasari, 68.

[i170]Vasari, 39.

[i171]Ibid.

[i172]Suppl. in Vasari, 60.

[i173]Vasari, 44.

[i174]Du Fresne.

[i175]Du Fresne.

[i176]Suppl. in Vasari, 61.

[i177]Ibid. 81.

[i178]Du Fresne.

[i179]Du Fresne. Add. to the Life in Vasari, 60.

[i180]Suppl. in Vasari, 69.

[i181]Du Fresne. Add. to Vasari, 60.

[i182]Du Fresne.

[i183]Add. in Vasari, 47.

[i184]Add. to Vasari, 48.

[i185]Add. in Vasari, 57.

[i186]Add. to Vasari, 58.

[i187]Add. to Vasari, 59.

[i188]Ibid.

[i189]Ibid. This is the picture lately exhibited in Brook Street, Grosvenor Square, and is said to have been purchased by the Earl of Warwick.

[i190]Add. to Vasari, 59.

[i191]Ibid.

[i192]Ibid.

[i193]Ibid.

[i194]Ibid. 60.

[i195]Ibid.

[i196]Ibid.

[i197]Ibid.

[i198]Ibid.

[i199]Lett. Pitt. vol. ii. 197.

[i200]Add. in Vasari, 60.

[i201]Add. in Vasari, 61.

[i202]Ibid.

[i203]Ibid.

[i204]Ibid.

[i205]Supp. in Vasari, 67.

[i206]Ibid. 68.

[i207]Supp. in Vasari, 75.

[i208]Ibid.

[i209]Supp. in Vasari, 80.

[i210]Supp. in Vasari, 81.

[1]This passage has been by some persons much misunderstood, and supposed to require, that the student should be a deep proficient in perspective, before he commences the study of painting; but it is a knowledge of the leading principles only of perspective that the author here means, and without such a knowledge, which is easily to be acquired, the student will inevitably fall into errors, as gross as those humorously pointed out by Hogarth, in his Frontispiece to Kirby’s Perspective.

[2]See Chap. 351.

[3]Not to be found in this work.

[4]From this, and many other similar passages, it is evident, that the author intended at some future time to arrange his manuscript collections, and to publish them as separate treatises. That he did not do so is well known; but it is also a fact, that, in selecting from the whole mass of his collections the chapters of which the present work consists, great care appears in general to have been taken to extract also those to which there was any reference from any of the chapters intended for this work, or which from their subject were necessarily connected with them. Accordingly, the reader will find, in the notes to this translation, that all such chapters in any other part of the present work are uniformly pointed out, as have any relation to the respective passages in the text. This, which has never before been done, though indispensably necessary, will be found of singular use, and it was thought proper here, once for all, to notice it.In the present instance the chapters, referring to the subject in the text, are Chap. xvi. xvii. xviii. xix. xx. xxvi.; and though these do not afford complete information, yet it is to be remembered, that drawing from relievos is subject to the very same rules as drawing from Nature; and that, therefore, what is elsewhere said on that subject is also equally applicable to this.

In the present instance the chapters, referring to the subject in the text, are Chap. xvi. xvii. xviii. xix. xx. xxvi.; and though these do not afford complete information, yet it is to be remembered, that drawing from relievos is subject to the very same rules as drawing from Nature; and that, therefore, what is elsewhere said on that subject is also equally applicable to this.

[5]The meaning of this is, that the last touches of light, such as the shining parts (which are always narrow), must be given sparingly. In short, that the drawing must be kept in broad masses as much as possible.

[6]This is not an absolute rule, but it is a very good one for drawing of portraits.

[7]See Chap. ci.

[8]See the preceding chapter.

[9]See the two preceding chapters.

[10]Man being the highest of the animal creation, ought to be the chief object of study.

[11]An intended Treatise, as it seems, on Anatomy, which however never was published; but there are several chapters in the present work on the subject of Anatomy, most of which will be found under the present head of Anatomy; and of such as could not be placed there, because they also related to some other branch, the following is a list by which they may be found: Chapters vi. vii. x. xi. xxxiv. xxxv. xxxvi. xxxvii. xxxviii. xxxix. xl. xli. xlii. xliii. xliv. xlv. xlvi. xlviii. xlix. l. li. lii. cxxix.

[12]See chap. lxxxvii.

[13]It does not appear that this intention was ever carried into execution; but there are many chapters in this work on the subject of motion, where all that is necessary for a painter in this branch will be found.

[14]Anatomists have divided this muscle into four or five sections; but painters, following the ancient sculptors, shew only the three principal ones; and, in fact, we find that a greater number of them (as may often be observed in nature) gives a disagreeable meagreness to the subject. Beautiful nature does not shew more than three, though there may be more hid under the skin.

[15]A treatise on weights, like many others, intended by this author, but never published.

[16]See the next chapter.

[17]It is believed that this treatise, like many others promised by the author, was never written; and to save the necessity of frequently repeating this fact, the reader is here informed, once for all, that in the life of the author prefixed to this edition, will be found an account of the works promised or projected by him, and how far his intentions have been carried into effect.

[18]See chap. lxiv.

[19]See in this work from chap. lx. to lxxxi.

[20]See chapters lxi. lxiv.

[21]See chapters civ. cliv.

[22]The author here means to compare the different quickness of the motion of the head and the heel, when employed in the same action of jumping; and he states the proportion of the former to be three times that of the latter. The reason he gives for this is in substance, that as the head has but one motion to make, while in fact the lower part of the figure has three successive operations to perform at the places he mentions, three times the velocity, or, in other words, three times the degree of effort, is necessary in the head, the prime mover, to give the power of influencing the other parts; and the rule deducible from this axiom is, that where two different parts of the body concur in the same action, and one of them has to perform one motion only, while the other is to have several, the proportion of velocity or effort in the former must be regulated by the number of operations necessary in the latter.

[23]It is explained in this work, or at least there is something respecting it in the preceding chapter, and in chap. cli.

[24]The eyeball moving up and down to look at the hand, describes a part of a circle, from every point of which it sees it in an infinite variety of aspects. The hand also is moveablead infinitum(for it can go round the whole circle—see chap. lxxxvii.), and consequently shew itself in an infinite variety of aspects, which it is impossible for any memory to retain.

[25]See chap. xx. clv.

[26]About thirteen yards of our measure, the Florentine braccia, or cubit, by which the author measures, being 1 foot 10 inches 7-8ths English measure.

[27]See chap. cxxi. and cccv.

[28]It is supposed that the figures are to appear of the natural size, and not bigger. In that case, the measure of the first, to be of the exact dimension, should have its feet resting upon the bottom line; but as you remove it from that, it should diminish.No allusion is here intended to the distance at which a picture is to be placed from the eye.

No allusion is here intended to the distance at which a picture is to be placed from the eye.

[29]The author does not mean here to say, that one historical picture cannot be hung over another. It certainly may, because, in viewing each, the spectator is at liberty (especially if they are subjects independent of each other) to shift his place so as to stand at the true point of sight for viewing every one of them; but in covering a wall with a succession of subjects from the same history, the author considers the whole as, in fact, but one picture, divided into compartments, and to be seen at one view, and which cannot therefore admit more than one point of sight. In the former case, the pictures are in fact so many distinct subjects unconnected with each other.

[30]See chap. cccxlviii.This chapter is obscure, and may probably be made clear by merely stating it in other words. Leonardo objects to the use of both eyes, because, in viewing in that manner the objects here mentioned, two balls, one behind the other, the second is seen, which would not be the case, if the angle of the visual rays were not too big for the first object. Whoever is at all acquainted with optics, need not be told, that the visual rays commence in a single point in the centre, or nearly the centre of each eye, and continue diverging. But, in using both eyes, the visual rays proceed not from one and the same centre, but from a different centre in each eye, and intersecting each other, as they do a little before passing the first object, they become together broader than the extent of the first object, and consequently give a view of part of the second. On the contrary, in using but one eye, the visual rays proceed but from one centre; and as, therefore, there cannot be any intersection, the visual rays, when they reach the first object, are not broader than the first object, and the second is completely hidden. Properly speaking, therefore, in using both eyes we introduce more than one point of sight, which renders the perspective false in the painting; but in using one eye only, there can be, as there ought, but one point of sight. There is, however, this difference between viewing real objects and those represented in painting, that in looking at the former, whether we use one or both eyes, the objects, by being actually detached from the back ground, admit the visual rays to strike on them, so as to form a correct perspective, from whatever point they are viewed, and the eye accordingly forms a perspective of its own; but in viewing the latter, there is no possibility of varying the perspective; and, unless the picture is seen precisely under the same angle as it was painted under, the perspective in all other views must be false. This is observable in the perspective views painted for scenes at the playhouse. If the beholder is seated in the central line of the house, whether in the boxes or pit, the perspective is correct; but, in proportion as he is placed at a greater or less distance to the right or left of that line, the perspective appears to him more or less faulty. And hence arises the necessity of using but one eye in viewing a painting, in order thereby to reduce it to one point of sight.

[30]See chap. cccxlviii.

This chapter is obscure, and may probably be made clear by merely stating it in other words. Leonardo objects to the use of both eyes, because, in viewing in that manner the objects here mentioned, two balls, one behind the other, the second is seen, which would not be the case, if the angle of the visual rays were not too big for the first object. Whoever is at all acquainted with optics, need not be told, that the visual rays commence in a single point in the centre, or nearly the centre of each eye, and continue diverging. But, in using both eyes, the visual rays proceed not from one and the same centre, but from a different centre in each eye, and intersecting each other, as they do a little before passing the first object, they become together broader than the extent of the first object, and consequently give a view of part of the second. On the contrary, in using but one eye, the visual rays proceed but from one centre; and as, therefore, there cannot be any intersection, the visual rays, when they reach the first object, are not broader than the first object, and the second is completely hidden. Properly speaking, therefore, in using both eyes we introduce more than one point of sight, which renders the perspective false in the painting; but in using one eye only, there can be, as there ought, but one point of sight. There is, however, this difference between viewing real objects and those represented in painting, that in looking at the former, whether we use one or both eyes, the objects, by being actually detached from the back ground, admit the visual rays to strike on them, so as to form a correct perspective, from whatever point they are viewed, and the eye accordingly forms a perspective of its own; but in viewing the latter, there is no possibility of varying the perspective; and, unless the picture is seen precisely under the same angle as it was painted under, the perspective in all other views must be false. This is observable in the perspective views painted for scenes at the playhouse. If the beholder is seated in the central line of the house, whether in the boxes or pit, the perspective is correct; but, in proportion as he is placed at a greater or less distance to the right or left of that line, the perspective appears to him more or less faulty. And hence arises the necessity of using but one eye in viewing a painting, in order thereby to reduce it to one point of sight.

[31]Chap. xcvi. and civ.

[32]See the Life of the Author prefixed, and chap. xx. and ci. of the present work.

[33]The author here speaks of unpolished Nature; and indeed it is from such subjects only, that the genuine and characteristic operations of Nature are to be learnt. It is the effect of education to correct the natural peculiarities and defects, and, by so doing, to assimilate one person to the rest of the world.

[34]See chap. cxxiii.

[35]See chap. cclxiv.

[36]See chapter cclxvii.

[37]Sir Joshua Reynolds frequently inculcated these precepts in his lectures, and indeed they cannot be too often enforced.

[38]Probably this would have formed a part of his intended Treatise on Light and Shadow, but no such proposition occurs in the present work.

[39]See chapters cc. and ccix.

[40]See chap. ccix.

[41]This cannot be taken as an absolute rule; it must be left in a great measure to the judgment of the painter. For much graceful softness and grandeur is acquired, sometimes, by blending the lights of the figures with the light part of the ground; and so of the shadows; as Leonardo himself has observed in chapters cxciv. cxcv. and Sir Joshua Reynolds has often put in practice with success.

[42]See chap. cclxv.

[43]See chap. cxcvi.

[44]He means here to say, that in proportion as the body interposed between the eye and the object is more or less transparent, the greater or less quantity of the colour of the body interposed will be communicated to the object.

[45]See the note to chap. cc.

[46]See the preceding chapter, and chap. cc.

[47]The appearance of motion is lessened according to the distance, in the same proportion as objects diminish in size.

[48]See chap. ccxvii. and ccxix.

[49]See chap. ccxv. and ccxix.

[50]This was intended to constitute a part of some book of Perspective, which we have not; but the rule here referred to will be found in chap. cccx. of the present work.

[51]See chap. ccxv. and ccxvii.

[52]No such work was ever published, nor, for any thing that appears, ever written.

[53]The French translation of 1716 has a note on this chapter, saying, that the invention of enamel painting found out since the time of Leonardo da Vinci, would better answer to the title of this chapter, and also be a better method of painting. I must beg leave, however, to dissent from this opinion, as the two kinds of painting are so different, that they cannot be compared. Leonardo treats of oil painting, but the other is vitrification. Leonardo is known to have spent a great deal of time in experiments, of which this is a specimen, and it may appear ridiculous to the practitioners of more modern date, as he does not enter more fully into a minute description of the materials, or the mode of employing them. The principle laid down in the text appears to me to be simply this: to make the oil entirely evaporate from the colours by the action of fire, and afterwards to prevent the action of the air by the means of a glass, which in itself is an excellent principle, but not applicable, any more than enamel painting to large works.

[54]It is evident that distemper or size painting is here meant.

[55]Indian ink.

[56]This rule is not without exception: see chap. ccxxxiv.

[57]See chap. ccxxxviii.

[58]See chap. ccxxxvii.

[59]See chapters ccxlvii. cclxxiv. in the present work. Probably they were intended to form a part of a distinct treatise, and to have been ranged as propositions in that, but at present they are not so placed.

[60]See chap. ccxlviii.

[61]See chap. cclxxiv.

[62]Although the author seems to have designed that this, and many other propositions to which he refers, should have formed a part of some regular work, and he has accordingly referred to them whenever he has mentioned them, by their intended numerical situation in that work, whatever it might be, it does not appear that he ever carried this design into execution. There are, however, several chapters in the present work, viz. ccxciii. cclxxxix. cclxxxv. ccxcv. in which the principle in the text is recognised, and which probably would have been transferred into the projected treatise, if he had ever drawn it up.

[63]The note on the preceding chapter is in a great measure applicable to this, and the proposition mentioned in the text is also to be found in chapter ccxlvii. of the present work.

[64]See the note on the chapter next but one preceding. The proposition in the text occurs in chap. ccxlvii. of the present work.

[65]Not in this work.

[66]I do not know a better comment on this passage than Felibien’s Examination of Le Brun’s Picture of the Tent of Darius. From this (which has been reprinted with an English translation, by Colonel Parsons in 1700, in folio) it will clearly appear, what the chain of connexion is between every colour there used, and its nearest neighbour, and consequently a rule may be formed from it with more certainty and precision than where the student is left to develope it for himself, from the mere inspection of different examples of colouring.

[67]See chap. ccxxiii. ccxxxvii. cclxxiv. cclxxxii. of the present work. We have before remarked, that the propositions so frequently referred to by the author, were never reduced into form, though apparently he intended a regular work in which they were to be included.

[68]No where in this work.

[69]This is evident in many of Vandyke’s portraits, particularly of ladies, many of whom are dressed in black velvet; and this remark will in some measure account for the delicate fairness which he frequently gives to the female complexion.

[70]These propositions, any more than the others mentioned in different parts of this work, were never digested into a regular treatise, as was evidently intended by the author, and consequently are not to be found, except perhaps in some of the volumes of the author’s manuscript collections.

[71]See chap. ccxciii. cccvii. cccviii.

[72]See chap. cclxxxvii.

[73]This book on perspective was never drawn up.

[74]See chap. ccxcii.

[75]See chap. ccxii. ccxlviii. cclv.

[76]There is no work of this author to which this can at present refer, but the principle is laid down in chapters cclxxxiv. cccvi. of the present treatise.

[77]See chapters cccvii. cccxxii.

[78]See chap. cxvi. cxxi. cccv.

[79]See chap. cccxiii. and cccxxiii.

[80]To our obtaining a correct idea of the magnitude and distance of any object seen from afar, it is necessary that we consider how much of distinctness an object loses at a distance (from the mere interposition of the air), as well as what it loses in size; and these two considerations must unite before we can decidedly pronounce as to its distance or magnitude. This calculation, as to distinctness, must be made upon the idea that the air is clear, as, if by any accident it is otherwise, we shall (knowing the proportion in which clear air dims a prospect) be led to conclude this farther off than it is, and, to justify that conclusion, shall suppose its real magnitude correspondent with the distance, at which from its degree of distinctness it appears to be. In the circumstance remarked in the text there is, however, a great deception; the fact is, that the colour and the minute parts of the object are lost in the fog, while the size of it is not diminished in proportion; and the eye being accustomed to see objects diminished in size at a great distance, supposes this to be farther off than it is, and consequently imagines it larger.

[81]This proposition, though undoubtedly intended to form a part of some future work, which never was drawn up, makes no part of the present.

[82]See chap. cccvii.

[83]Vide chap. ccxcii. ccciii.

[84]See chapter ccxcviii.

[85]This was probably to have been a part of some other work, but it does not occur in this.

[86]Cento braccia, or cubits. The Florence braccio is one foot ten inches seven eighths, English measure.

[87]Probably the Author here means yellow lilies, or fleurs de lis.

[88]That point is always found in the horizon, and is called the point of sight, or the vanishing point.

[89]See chap. cccxx.

[90]See chap. cccxvii.

[91]This position has been already laid down in chapter cxxiv. (and will also be found in chapter cccxlviii.); and the reader is referred to the note on that passage, which will also explain that in the text, for further illustration. It may, however, be proper to remark, that though the author has here supposed both objects conveyed to the eye by an angle of the same extent, they cannot, in fact, be so seen, unless one eye be shut; and the reason is this: if viewed with both eyes, there will be two points of sight, one in the centre of each eye; and the rays from each of these to the objects must of course be different, and will consequently form different angles.

[92]The braccio is one foot ten inches and seven eighths English measure.

[93]i.e. To be abridged according to the rules of perspective.

[94]See chap. cxxii.

[95]The whole of this chapter, like the next but one preceding, depends on the circumstance of there being in fact two points of sight, one in the centre of each eye, when an object is viewed with both eyes. In natural objects the effect which this circumstance produces is, that the rays from each point of sight, diverging as they extend towards the object, take in not only that, but some part also of the distance behind it, till at length, at a certain distance behind it, they cross each other; whereas, in a painted representation, there being no real distance behind the object, but the whole being a flat surface, it is impossible that the rays from the points of sight should pass beyond that flat surface; and as the object itself is on that flat surface, which is the real extremity of the view, the eyes cannot acquire a sight of any thing beyond.

[96]A well-known painter at Florence, contemporary with Leonardo da Vinci, who painted several altar-pieces and other public works.

[97]See chap. cxxiv. and cccxlviii.

[98]See chap. x.

[99]See chap. cci.

[100]Leonardo da Vinci was remarkably fond of this kind of invention, and is accused of having lost a great deal of time that way.

[101]The method here recommended, was the general and common practice at that time, and continued so with little, if any variation, till lately. But about thirty years ago, the late Mr. Bacon invented an entirely new method, which, as better answering the purpose, he constantly used, and from him others have also adopted it into practice.

[102]This may be a good method of dividing the figure for the purpose of reducing from large to small, orvice versâ; but it not being the method generally used by the painters for measuring their figures, as being too minute, this chapter was not introduced amongst those of general proportions.

Back to Index Next