Vasari's Lives and Cicero's Brutus

E. H. Gombrich

Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 23, No. 3/4. (Jul. - Dec., 1960), pp.309-311.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0075-4390%28196007%2F12%2923%3A3%2F4%3C309%3AVLACB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G

Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes is currently published by The Warburg Institute.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/journals/warburg.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academicjournals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community takeadvantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.orgMon Oct 22 08:18:02 2007

309 SOME SCULPTURES OF THE DUCAL PALACE, VENICE

Langford Jones sought to carry the rele- vance further, by identifying as "Veritas" the figure in the middle of the upper arcade on the west front of the Palace (unmentioned both by Ruskin and by Rossi and Salerni). He suggested that its title, not easily visible from pavement level, had been misread; but it is clearly VENECIA, and the accompany- ing inscribed scroll (apparently unnoticed by him)2 leaves no room for doubt as to the

=FORTIS IVSTA TRONO FVRIAS MARE SVB PEDE PONO.

VASARI'S LIVES AND CICERO'S BRUTUS

The famous programmatic statement with which Vasari prefaced the Second Part

of his Lives culminates in his cautious formu- lation of an evolutionary hypothesis :

Having carefully weighed these matters in my mind, I have come to the conclusion that there is a property and a particular nature inherent in those arts that from humble beginnings go on to improve by small degrees and finally attain the peak of perfection. And I have come to this belief because I have seen this to have happened with other faculties; since there is a certain kinship between all the liberal arts, this fact is no minor argument in favour of its truth. But what must have happened to painting and sculpture is so similar that if the names were exchanged the events would be pre- cisely the same. Thus one can see (if one must believe those who lived close to those times and could see and judge the efforts of the ancients) that the statues of Canachus were very hard and without any life and movement, and hence rather far removed from the truth; the same is said of those of Calamis although they were slightly sweeter than the foregoing. Then came Myron who did not altogether and com- pletely imitate the truth of nature but gave to his works such proportion and grace that they could with reason be described as beautiful. In the third phase there suc-ceeded Polycleitus and the others who were so much praised who, as it is said and as one must believe, made their works wholly perfect. That same progress was bound to happen to painting as well, for it is said

identity of the figure--disposing of the further hypothesis that this figure relates to the con- clusion of the story: the pronouncement of the third young man that stronger even than women is Truth ( I Esdras iv. 35). Although this hypothesis and certain consequent sug- gestions made by Jones are, therefore, un- tenable, the reference to the Esdras story seems plausible and at least worthy to be placed on record.

and we must believe that it was probably so, that there was little perfection in the work of those who painted with one colour only and were called monochromists. Then, in the work of Zeuxis, Polygnotus, Timantes and the others who only used four colours the lines, contours and shapes are universally praised, but no doubt they left something to be desired. But then in Erion, Nicomachus, Protogenes and Apelles everything is perfect and most beautiful and it is impossible to imagine anything better, since these not only excellently represented the forms and movements of the bodies but also the affections and passions of the mind."

The bird's-eye view of the history of ancient art which Vasari here presents in support of his theory is taken from Cicero's Brutw (70) :

Quis enim eorum qui haec rninora animadvertunt non intellegit Canachi signa rigidiora esse quam ut imitentur veri- tatem; Calamidis dura illa quidem, sed tamen molliora quam Canachi; nondum Myronis satis ad veritatem adducta, iam tamen quae non dubites pulchra dicere; pulchriora etiam Polycliti et iam plane perfecta, ut mihi quidem videri solent? Similis in pictura ratio est ;in qua Zeuxim et Polygnotum et Timanthem et eorum, qui non sunt usi plus quam quattuor coloribus, formas et liniamenta laudamus; at in Aetione, Nicomacho, Protogene, Apelle iam perfecta sunt omnia. Et nescio an reli- quis in rebus omnibus idem eveniat; nihil est enim simul et inventum et perfectum . . . Vasari's quotation, at this central point of

his argument, from Cicero's brief conspectus of art history rather than from Pliny or Quin-

310 NOTES

tilian's similar outlines opens up interesting perspectives. For Cicero, too, invokes the evolution of ancient art as evidence for a general law of human development : nothing can be invented and perfected at the same time. Now in the context of Cicero's Brutus this formulation serves a polemical purpose. The Brutus constitutes Cicero's defence against a criticism which the younger generation of orators with Brutus and Calvus at their head had increasingly levelled against his style. This group of "Atticists" preached a return to the restraint and clarity of the classic stylists of the fourth century. I t was this element of reaction that Cicero wanted to counter with his evolutionary picture. To go back to the time of the inventors of oratory means to forego the later improvements. I t was, in fact, in support of this plea that he set out to describe the rise of Roman oratory from Cato onwards. For, to be consistent, a Roman orator should surely not preach a return to the style of the Greek Lysias but rather to that of Cato, the pioneer of Latin oratory. This is meant as a reductio ad absurdum. For Cicero acknowledges that for all its virtues Cato's style was "not sufficiently polished" to serve as a model and that "something more perfect" was needed.

I t is at this point that Cicero adduces his example from the history of sculpture and painting which Vasari took over, and we can now see that the borrowing was not acci-dental. For Vasari too shows himself anxious, in the same preface, to defend himself against any suspicion of wanting to praise pioneers for their own sake: "I do not want anyone to believe me so obtuse or so lacking in judg- ment as not to know that the works of Giotto and of Andrea and Giovanni Pisano and all the rest. ..would neither deserve extravagant nor even moderate praise if we were to com- pare them with those who were active after them . . .but those who consider the quality of the times . . . will deem them not beautiful, as I said, but miraculous."

The many passages in this vein scattered throughout Vasari's work have been a stumb- ling block to those modern critics who, like Lionello Venturi, have traced (and shared) il gusto deiprimitiui. I t is all the more interest- ing to note that they are not as unsophisti- cated in their origin as they appear on the surface. They are derived from polemics against the Atticists-that is, against the "primitivists" of Cicero's time, who preferred the harsh grandeur of Attic models to the

polished prolixity of the "Asiatic" school. Like Vasari, Cicero again and again returns to the problem of progress and historical rela- tivity. Indeed, Atticus, as one of his inter- locutors, chides him for his charity to earlier orators; ". . . cum in ceteribus rebus tum in dicendo semper, quo iam nihil est melius, id laudari, qualecumque est, solet" (296). Earlier in the dialogue Cicero had accorded Crassus the honour of having almost led ora- tory to the summit ("iam ad summum paene esse perductam") (I 61). Surely, Atticus says, if Cicero pointed to Crassus's speech in sup- port of the Servilian law as his model, he was like Lysippus calling the Doryphorus of Poly- cleitus his master. There is more in this self- praise than mere vanity. Cicero was con-vinced that oratory is a skill and that absolute standards exist to measure it. What counts in the art of persuasion is the ability to persuade. The law-courts are the testing ground, the jury's verdict the test. Even the unlearned must know whether they are moved or not: "Itaque nunquam de bono oratore aut non bono doctis hominibus cum populo dissensio fuit" (185). In any contest between Cato and Cicero, it is implied, Cicero would surely win because the art of playing on the emotions has made objective progress. I t is this faith in the unity of pur- pose throughout the vicissitudes of stylistic change that links Cicero's view of progress with that of Vasari as it has been analysed by Svetlana Alpers in another part of this Journal.

I t was because he found this practical view questioned by a kind of l'art pour l'art aestheti- cism among the Atticists that Cicero turned historian to meditate on style in a historical setting. His declared intention "oratorum genera distinguere aetatibus" (74) fore-shadows Vasari's programme.

No historian of any artistic evolution could fail to learn from the way ancient critics of oratory described and discussed the history of their art. These larger questions lie outside the scope of this note ;but one more parallel between the structure of Vasari's Lives and Cicero's Brutus may still be mentioned in conclusion :

Cicero is unwilling to include the living in his survey of the rise of eloquence, with one exception only: he allows himself to be pre- vailed upon by Brutus to include a eulogy of Caesar. The dialogue form enables Cicero to turn this tribute to good purpose. One of the interlocutors is made to quote from Caesar's lost treatise De Analogia, which he had dedi-

311 VASARI'S LIVES AND CICERO'S BRUTUS

cated to Cicero with flattering remarks. But whatever his ulterior motives, Cicero's com- pliment to Caesar, his praise of the great man's purity of speech and vigour of style pre- figures, however remotely, Vasari's original

EDWARD VI AND T H E POPE

A Tudor anti-papal allegory and its setting

Asmall panel-painting which has been in the possession of the Colvile family since

the middle of the seventeenth century depicts Henry VIII on his deathbed pointing towards his son and successor, Edward VI (Pl. 41 a). l The young King is enthroned beneath a cloth of estate and at the feet of this doll-like figure there lies an open book inscribed THE WORDE OF THE LORDE ENDVRETH FOR EVER; it is the Word of God whose purity crushes down and vanquishes the im- pure Roman pontiff. The Pope wears the triple tiara, the infulae of which are adorned with the words IDOLATRT and SVPER-STICION, and he is attired in a pink alb and golden cope. The front of the alb is inscribed ALL FLESHE IS GRASSE and nearby is a further inscription : FEY3VED HOLT3VES. Close to the Pope, in the left-hand corner, there are two monks or friars, one of whom is casting a baneful glance towards the young ruler, and they are engaged in tugging at chains which meet at a tablet inscribed POP(E)S and which continues in the direc- tion of the King's dais which they are at- tempting to cast down. One is attired in a brown habit and the other in a black, allud- ing, it may be suspected, to the two orders of friars, the Franciscan and Dominican, always regarded as especial agents of papal power. Immediately to the right of Edward there stands a Knight of the Garter; and a little below him, seated around a table, there are seven other persons including four Garter Knights and two clerics. Above this group a window opens out on to an open space where two men are hauling down an image of the Virgin and Child and another is busy smash- ing a statue into pieces. In the distance there lies a heap of smouldering ruins. The picture also contains no less than five spaces which

Oils on panel, 242 x 35 inches.

decision to include in his account of the rise of the arts da Cimabue in puoi only one living master, Michelangelo.

E. H. GOMBRICH

at one time held explanatory matter that has since entirely disappeared.

The portrait of Edward VI is derived from the earliest portrait series of the new King (Pl. 41b), of which a version at Petworth is dated 1547.~ The nobleman who stands to the King's left can safely be identified as Protector Somerset from the miniature of him by Nicholas Hilliard (Pl. 41d), probably exe- cuted after a now lost Holbeinesque originaL3 Protector Somerset was Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford, the King's uncle, and the man who had plotted the overthrow of the provisions made by Henry VIII for his son's minority, even while the late King had lain on his deathbed. Three days after Henry's demise, on January 31st, 1547, when the executors of the King's will met in the Tower, the settlement was violated by the recognition of Hertford, soon to be Duke of Somerset, as Lord Protector. The coup was completed on March I gth when Edward nominated twenty- six Privy Counsellors and gave to the new Protector power to summon "suche and so many as he from tyme to tyme shall thyncke ~onvenient".~Seven of these counsellors are depicted around the table in this picture. In the top row the features of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, and most ardent exponent of the Reformation, are discernible, a likeness taken from the portrait by the German artist, Gerlach Flicke, now in the

'Versions in the possession of John Wyndham (Petworth), Sir Danvers Osborn, H.M. the Queen (Windsor Castle) and elsewhere.

a Done by Hilliard at the age of thirteen, eight years after Somerset's death. See A. MacKay, The Collection of Miniatures in Montague Howe, I 896, p. I I 3 ( I 8) ; JVicholas Hilliard and Isaac Oliver Exhibition, Victoria and Albert Museum, 1947 (no. 3). Other portraits of Somerset which are useful for comparison with this picture are in the Wallace Collection and at Longleat (wearing the Garter collar).

4 For the general political background, see A. F. Pollard, England under Protector Somerset, London, I goo ; J. A. Froude, A History of England, London, 1885, IV, pp. 244 ff.; G. Burnet, The History of the Reformation, Oxford, I 829 ed., 111, pp. I ff. ;J. Strype, M m r i a l s of the Reformation, Oxford, 1822 ed., I, ii, pp. 17 ff.; P. Heylyn, Ecclesia Restaurata, 1899, I, pp. 60 ff.