CHAPTER V

.—BOTTICELLI AND LEONARDO DA VINCI

Footnote 46:

_Botticelli._ The standard work is Herbert P. Horne, _Sandro Botticelli_, London, 1908. A little additional information may be found in Crowe and Cavalcaselle, _A History of Painting in Italy_, Hutton Ed. Vol. II, and in Venturi, _Storia dell’ Arte Italiana_, Vol. VII, pt. 1.

Walter Pater’s essay in _The Renaissance_ offers beautifully a one-sided view. The essays, the _Soul of a Fact_, and _Quattrocentisteria_, in Maurice Hewlett’s _Earthwork out of Tuscany_ are poetically illuminative. Mr. Berenson’s analysis in _Florentine Painters of the Renaissance_ is important. I have written more fully on Botticelli in _Estimates in Art_, New York, 1912.

Botticelli’s Dante illustrations are published in a cheaper and more sumptuous form by Friedrich P. Lippmann. _Botticelli, Zeichnungen von Sandro Botticelli_, Berlin, 1896.

Lists of Botticelli’s works differ considerably. I incline to accept a number of early paintings which are neglected by such exclusive critics as Berenson and Horne. My own list, which for reasons of space cannot be given here, would not differ much from that of A. Venturi, in _Storia_ VII, i, 588–642.

Footnote 47:

_Filippino Lippi._ I. B. Supino, _Les deux Lippi_, Firenze, 1904.

Footnote 48:

_Piero di Cosimo._ Fritz Knapp, _Piero di Cosimo_, Halle, 1899. As usual later information in Venturi, _Storia_, Vol. VII, pt. 1.

Footnote 49:

This extraordinary series of which four have been recovered is fully discussed and somewhat differently interpreted by Roger E. Fry, in _Burlington Magazine_, Vol. XXXVIII, p. 131_f._ See also letter on page 257.

Footnote 50:

_Leonardo da Vinci._ The standard life is by W. von Seidlitz, _Leonardo da Vinci_, Berlin, 1909. The early work of Leonardo and his relations with Verrocchio have been thoroughly and lucidly analyzed by Jens Thys, _Leonardo da Vinci_, London, 1913. Amid the confusingly rich bibliography, the student may do well to stick to Vasari’s admirable _Life_ in any of the translations, to Dr. O. Sirén’s scholarly and cautious book _Leonardo da Vinci_, New Haven, and London, 1916 and to the late Dr. J. P. Richter’s incomparable work “The Literary Works of Leonardo da Vinci,” London, 1883, obtainable only in libraries. Giovanni Poggi, _Leonardo da Vinci_, Firenze, 1919, has thoroughly edited Vasari’s _Life_, and should be consulted for latest views and for illustrations. My own view on the early development of Leonardo, a most disputed matter, is set forth more fully in _Art and Archæology_, Vol. IV. pp. 111–122.

For literary side-lights Walter Pater’s essay, in _The Renaissance_; for an iconoclastic view Berenson in _Study and Criticism of Italian Art_, Fourth Series, New York, 1920. Edward McCurdy’s selected translations from _The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci_, New York, 1906, are valuable for those to whom Richter is inaccessible. Leonardo’s drawings, which are no less important than his paintings, may best be approached through Mr. Berenson’s monumental work, _The Drawings of the Florentine Painters_, New York and London, 1903, while the drawings before 1480 are clearly and ably discussed by Dr. Thys.

Footnote 51:

The capital mistake of the more exclusive critics of Leonardo’s early work is that they set this delightful little masterpiece at the beginning of the series in an impossibly early date. There is no such manipulation of paint and no such feeling for unity of landscape before 1475 or so. Being a revision of the design of the Uffizi Annunciation, it is necessarily later.

My list of Leonardo’s would include, in approximate order:

1. In Verocchio’s Baptism. The landscape at left and distance, the Angel kneeling to right, about 1470, Uffizi.

2. Madonna and Child with an Angel, design by Verrocchio, London.

3. The Annunciation, design mostly by Verrocchio, about 1475, Uffizi.

4. Portrait of a Girl, possibly a Verrocchio, Prince Liechtenstein, Vienna.

5. Annunciation, Louvre.

6. Benois Madonna, about 1478–9, Petrograd.

7. St. Jerome, unfinished, Vatican, Rome.

8. Adoration of the Magi, left unfinished about 1481, Uffizi.

9. Cartoon of St. Ann, Burlington House, London.

10. Madonna of the Rocks, between 1480–83, Paris.

11. So-called Belle Ferronnière, perhaps bottega piece, about 1490, Paris.

12. Girl with an Ermine, perhaps a bottega piece, about 1495, Cracow.

13. Clay model of the Sforza horse, destroyed in 1500.

14. Last Supper, 1498, Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan.

15. Cartoon for a St. Ann, lost but represented by sketches at Venice, 1503.

16. Madonna of the Distaff, represented by old copies.

17. Cartoon for Battle of Anghiari, only central group painted, partly represented by sketches and old copies, 1504.

18. Portrait of Mona Lisa, Paris.

19. Cartoon for a standing Leda, probably only the figure, since numerous old copies have widely varying accessories.

20. Madonna of the Rocks, 1507, London.

21. Cartoon for a Kneeling Leda, the figure only. Sketches and old copies.

22. Madonna and St. Ann, Paris.

23. St. John, half-length, Paris.

All Leonardo’s main activity as a painter lies from 1470–1500. He painted a picture about every two years.

Various sculptures have been ascribed to Leonardo. Of these only two, which will have been made in Verrocchio’s _bottega_ and under his direction, seem to me to deserve the distinction. A terra cotta Madonna and Child in the Metropolitan Museum, there ascribed to Verrocchio’s school, may represent Leonardo’s modelling about 1465. A stucco Madonna owned by Mr. George Diblee, at Oxford, is perhaps ten years later. The first is discussed by me in _Art and Archaeology_, Vol. IV, p. 122; the second is reproduced and accepted as a Leonardo by Prof. A. Venturi in _L’ Arte_, Vol. XXV, p. 131.

Footnote 52:

The best study of this picture and of its contemporary influence is that of George Gronau in _Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst_. N. F. Vol. XXIII, pp. 253–259. He fails to perceive that so primitive a picture as late as 1478 furnishes the best reason for accepting most of the rejected early Leonardos.

Footnote 53:

In all this matter Jens Thys’s admirable studies are indispensable. See note 5 above.

Footnote 54:

The Lady and the Ermine and the Belle Ferronnière are thoroughly discussed by H. Ochenkowski, _Burlington Magazine_, Vol. XXXIV, p. 186 _f._, where a full bibliography will be found.

Footnote 55:

This error which has persisted since Vasari was finally corrected by the great restorer Cavenaghi in his report of the last restoration. Malaguzzi Valeri in _Milano_, Bergamo, 1906, pt. 2, p. 14, first advanced the correct view that the painting was done in tempera.

Footnote 56:

Kenyon Cox, _Concerning Painting_, New York, 1917, p. 73.

Footnote 57:

_Fra Bartolommeo._ The standard work is Fritz Knapp’s _Fra Bartolommeo della Porta_, Halle, 1903. H. v. d. Gablentz, _Fra Bartolommeo_ in 2 vols., Leipzig, 1922.

Footnote 58:

_Andrea del Sarto._ H. Guinness, _Andrea del Sarto_, London and New York, 1901. Andrea’s drawings are finely analyzed by Bernard Berenson in _The Drawings of the Florentine Painters_.

Footnote 59:

_Bronzino._ Hans Schulze, _Die Werke Angelo Bronzino’s_, Strassburg, 1911.

Footnote 60:

_Pontormo._ We have two admirable books by the same writer, Dr. F. M. Clapp; _Les Dessins de Pontormo_, Paris, 1914; _Pontormo, his Life and Work_, New Haven, 1916.

Pontormo’s supreme masterpiece of portraiture, The Halberdier, is published by myself in _Art in America_, Vol. X, p. 66.

##