WeRead Powered by ReaderPub
Anecdotes of Painters, Engravers, Sculptors and Architects, and Curiosities of Art (Vol. 3 of 3) cover

Anecdotes of Painters, Engravers, Sculptors and Architects, and Curiosities of Art (Vol. 3 of 3)

Chapter 196: FOOTNOTES:
Open in WeRead

About This Book

This volume assembles short biographies, anecdotes, and technical accounts related to artists, sculptors, engravers, and architects across antiquity and later European periods. It opens with careful descriptions of Egyptian monuments — pyramids, obelisks, temples, and tombs — and recounts practical episodes of excavation, transport, and measurement. The middle sections offer biographical sketches and memorable stories about Renaissance and Baroque masters, their methods, trials, and relationships, while interleaving observations on technique and mechanics. Engineering curiosities and comparative reflections on ancient versus modern skill conclude the collection, emphasizing the interplay of artistic temperaments and practical ingenuity.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Arnolfo had proposed to raise the cupola immediately above the first cornice, from the model of the church in the chapel of the Spaniards, where the cupola is extremely small. Arnolfo was followed by Giotto in 1331. To Giotto succeeded Taddeo Gaddi, after whom, first Andrea Orgagna, next Lorenzo di Filippo, and lastly Brunelleschi were architects of the Cathedral.

[2] The story of Columbus and the Egg is familiar to every one. The jest undoubtedly originated with Brunelleschi, as it is attested by many of the Italian writers; it happened in 1420, fourteen years before Columbus was born. Toscanelli was a great admirer of Brunelleschi, whose knowledge of the Scriptures and powers of argument were so great, that he could successfully dispute in public assemblies, or in private with the most learned theologians, so that Toscanelli was accustomed to say that "to hear Filippo in argument, one might fancy one's self listening to a second Paul." So capital a retort could hardly have failed to reach Columbus, through his instructor, nor would he have hesitated to use it against his antagonists under similar circumstances. Brunelleschi was born in 1377 and died in 1444; Columbus in 1436, and died in 1506.

[3] Vasari means that Lorenzo continued to receive his salary till 1426, although Filippo had been appointed sole master of the works in 1423, as he himself relates in the sequel.

[4] How different was the treatment Ghiberti received from Brunelleschi, when the artists presented their models for one of the bronze doors of the Baptistery of San Giovanni at Florence. The designs of Ghiberti, Brunelleschi, and Donatello, were considered the three best; but the two latter, considering that Ghiberti was fairly entitled to the prize, withdrew their claims in his favor, and persuaded the syndics to adjudge the work to him. Brunelleschi was requested to undertake the work in concert with Ghiberti, but he would not consent to this, desiring to be first in some other art or undertaking than equal, or perhaps secondary, in another. "Now, this was in truth," says Vasari, "the sincere rectitude of friendship; it was talent without envy, and uprightness of judgment in a decision respecting themselves, by which these artists were more highly honored than they could have been by conducting the work to the utmost summit of perfection. Happy spirits! who, while aiding each other took pleasure in commending the labors of their competitors. How unhappy, on the contrary, are the artists of our day, laboring to injure each other, yet still unsatisfied, they burst with envy, while seeking to wound others."

[5] This distrust seems astonishing, after what Brunelleschi had accomplished, but it shows the opposition and enmity he had to encounter. In 1434, he received a mortifying affront from the Guild of Builders. Finding that he carried on the building without thinking to pay the annual tax due from every artist who exercised his calling, they caused him to be apprehended and thrown into prison. As soon as this outrage was known to the wardens, they instantly assembled with indignation, and issued a solemn decree, commanding that Filippo should be liberated, and that the Consuls of the Guild should be imprisoned, which was accordingly done. Baldinucci discovered and printed the authentic document containing the decree, which is dated August 20, 1434.

[6] Masselli says that the Tuscan braccio, is the ancient Roman foot doubled for greater convenience, and is equal to one foot nine inches and six lines, Paris measure. The editors of the Florentine edition of Vasari, 1846-9, remark that the measure of the whole edifice as given by Vasari, differs from that given by Fantozzi; the latter gives 196 braccia as its total height. Milizia says, "Brunelleschi completed his undertaking, which surpassed in height any work of the ancients. The lantern alone remained imperfect; but he left a model for it, and always recommended, even in his last moments, that it should be built of heavy marble, because the cupola being raised on four arches, it would have a tendency to spring upwards if not pressed with a heavy weight. The three mathematicians who have written on the cupola of St. Peter's, have clearly demonstrated a truth differing from the opinion of Brunelleschi, viz., that the small cupola increases, in a great degree, the lateral pressure. The whole height of the structure from the ground to the top, is 385 feet; that is, to the lantern 293 feet, the latter being 68 feet 6 inches; the ball 8 feet; the cross 15 feet 6 inches. *  *  *

"The plan of the dome is octangular; each side in the interior is 57 feet, and the clear width between the sides, not measuring into the angles, is 137 feet; the walls are 16 feet 9 inches thick; the whole length of the church is 500 feet. The nave has four pointed arches on each side, on piers, separating it from the side aisles. The transept and choir have no side aisles, but are portions of an octagon, attached to the base of the dome, giving the whole plan the figure of a cross. The edifice has a Gothic character, and is incrusted in marble and mosaic work." *  *  *

According to Fontani, this cupola exceeds that of the Vatican, both in height and circumference by four braccia; and although supported by eight ribs only, which renders it much lighter than that of the Vatican, which has sixteen flanking buttresses, it is nevertheless more solid and firm. Thus it has never required to be supported by circling hoops of iron, nor has it demanded the labors of the many engineers and architects who have printed volumes upon the subject. The construction of this cupola is remarkable in these particulars—that it is octangular, that it is double, and built entirely on the walls, unsupported by piers, and that there are no apparent counterforts.