Preface to the Lives

I have no manner of doubt that it is with almost all writers a common and deeply-fixed opinion that sculpture and painting together were first discovered, by the light of nature, by the people of Egypt, and that there are certain others who attribute to the Chaldæans the first rough sketches in marble and the first reliefs in statuary, even as they also give to the Greeks the invention of the brush and of colouring. But I will surely say that of both one and the other of these arts the design, which is their foundation, nay rather, the very soul that conceives and nourishes within itself all the parts of man's intellect, was already most perfect before the creation of all other things, when the Almighty God, having made the great body of the world and having adorned the heavens with their exceeding bright lights, descended lower with His intellect into the clearness of the air and the solidity of the earth, and, shaping man, discovered, together with the lovely creation of all things, the first form of sculpture; from which man afterwards, step by step (and this may not be denied), as from a true pattern, there were taken statues, sculptures, and the science of pose and of outline; and for the first pictures (whatsoever they were), softness, harmony, and the concord in discord that comes from light and shade. Thus, then, the first model whence there issued the first image of man was a lump of clay, and not without reason, seeing that the Divine Architect of time and of nature, being Himself most perfect, wished to show in the imperfection of the material the way to add and to take away; in the same manner wherein the good sculptors and painters are wont to work, who, adding and taking away in their models, bring their imperfect sketches to that final perfection which they desire. He gave to man that most vivid colour of flesh, whence afterwards there were drawn for painting, from the mines of the earth, the colours themselves for the counterfeiting of all those things that are required for pictures. It is true, indeed, that it cannot be affirmed for certain what was made by the men before the Flood in these arts in imitation of so beautiful a work, although it is reasonable to believe that they too carved and painted in every manner; seeing that Belus, son of the proud Nimrod, about 200 years after the Flood, caused to be made that statue wherefrom there was afterwards born idolatry, and his son's wife, the very famous Semiramis, Queen of Babylon, in the building of that city, placed among its adornments not only diverse varied kinds of animals, portrayed and coloured from nature, but also the image of herself and of Ninus, her husband, and, moreover, statues in bronze of her husband's father, of her husband's mother, and of the mother of the latter, as Diodorus relates, calling them by the Greek names (that did not yet exist), Jove, Juno, and Ops. From these statues, perchance, the Chaldæans learnt to make the images of their gods, seeing that 150 years later Rachel, in flying from Mesopotamia together with Jacob her husband, stole the idols of Laban her father, as is clearly related in Genesis. Nor, indeed, were the Chaldæans alone in making sculptures and pictures, but the Egyptians made them also, exercising themselves in these arts with that so great zeal which is shown in the marvellous tomb of the most ancient King Osimandyas, copiously described by Diodorus, and proved by the stern commandment made by Moses in the Exodus from Egypt, namely, that under pain of death there should be made to God no image whatsoever. He, on descending from the mountain, having found the golden calf wrought and adored solemnly by his people, and being greatly perturbed to see Divine honours paid to the image of a beast, not only broke it and reduced it to powder, but for punishment of so great a sin caused many thousands of the wicked sons of Israel to be slain by the Levites. But because not the making of statues but their adoration was a deadly sin, we read in Exodus that the art of design and of statuary, not only in marble but in every kind of metal, was bestowed by the mouth of God on Bezaleel, of the tribe of Judah, and on Aholiab, of the tribe of Dan, who were those that made the two cherubim of gold, the candlesticks, the veil, the borders of the priestly vestments, and so many other most beautiful castings for the Tabernacle, for no other reason than to bring the people to contemplate and to adore them.

I have no doubt that almost all writers hold a common and deeply rooted opinion. They believe that the Egyptians first discovered sculpture and painting through natural insight. Some others credit the Chaldæans with the first rough carvings in marble and the first sculptural reliefs. They also credit the Greeks with inventing the brush and the use of color. But I maintain that design was already most perfect before the creation of all other things. Design is the foundation of both arts. Indeed, it is their very soul, conceiving and nurturing within itself every part of the human intellect. Almighty God made the great body of the world and adorned the heavens with their exceedingly bright lights. Then his mind turned downward to the clarity of the air and the solidity of the earth. By shaping man, he revealed the first form of sculpture, along with the beautiful creation of all things. From man, as a true model, statues and sculptures were later derived, step by step. The science of pose and outline was also derived from him. This cannot be denied. From him, too, came the softness, harmony, and unity in contrast produced by light and shade in the first pictures, whatever they were. The first model from which the first image of man emerged was therefore a lump of clay. There was good reason for this. The Divine Architect of time and nature was himself most perfect. He wished to show, through the imperfection of the material, how to add and take away. Good sculptors and painters work in the same way. By adding to and removing from their models, they bring their imperfect sketches to the final perfection they desire. God gave man the most vivid color of flesh. Later, colors were drawn from the mines of the earth for use in painting. With these, painters could imitate everything needed in their pictures. It is true that we cannot say with certainty what people made in these arts before the Flood, imitating so beautiful a work. Still, it is reasonable to believe that they too carved and painted in every manner. About 200 years after the Flood, Belus, son of the proud Nimrod, had a statue made. Idolatry later arose from that statue. His son’s wife was the very famous Semiramis, Queen of Babylon. While building that city, she adorned it with many different kinds of animals, depicted and colored from nature. She also placed there images of herself and her husband, Ninus. She added bronze statues of her husband’s father, his mother, and his mother’s mother. Diodorus relates this, calling them by the Greek names Jove, Juno, and Ops, which did not yet exist. Perhaps the Chaldæans learned from these statues to make images of their gods. For 150 years later, Rachel fled Mesopotamia with her husband Jacob and stole her father Laban’s idols, as Genesis clearly relates. The Chaldæans were not alone in making sculptures and pictures. The Egyptians made them too, practicing these arts with great zeal. Their zeal is shown in the marvelous tomb of the ancient King Osimandyas, which Diodorus describes at length. It is also proved by Moses’s stern commandment during the Exodus from Egypt. He commanded that no image of God should be made, on pain of death. When Moses came down from the mountain, he found that his people had made a golden calf and were solemnly worshipping it. He was deeply troubled to see divine honors paid to the image of a beast. He not only broke the calf and reduced it to powder, but also had the Levites kill many thousands of the wicked sons of Israel as punishment for so great a sin. But making statues was not a deadly sin, worshipping them was. We read in Exodus that God himself bestowed the art of design and sculpture on Bezaleel of the tribe of Judah and Aholiab of the tribe of Dan. Their art included work in marble and every kind of metal. They made the two golden cherubim, the candlesticks, the veil, the borders of the priestly vestments, and many other beautiful cast works for the Tabernacle. Their only purpose was to bring the people to contemplate and adore these objects.

From the things seen before the Flood, then, the pride of men found the way to make the statues of those for whom they wished that they should remain famous and immortal in the world. And the Greeks, who think differently about this origin, say that the Ethiopians invented the first statues, as Diodorus tells; that the Egyptians took them from the Ethiopians, and, from them, the Greeks; for by Homer's time sculpture and painting are seen to have been perfected, as it is proved, in discoursing of the shield of Achilles, by that divine poet, who shows it to us carved and painted, rather than described, with every form of art. Lactantius Firmianus, by way of fable, attributes it to Prometheus, who, in the manner of Almighty God, shaped man's image out of mud; and from him, he declares, the art of statuary came. But according to what Pliny writes, this came to Egypt from Gyges the Lydian, who, being by the fire and gazing at his own shadow, suddenly, with some charcoal in his hand, drew his own outline on the wall. And from that age, for a time, outlines only were wont to be used, with no body of colour, as the same Pliny confirms; which method was rediscovered with more labour by Philocles the Egyptian, and likewise by Cleanthes and Ardices of Corinth and by Telephanes of Sicyon.

From what had been seen before the Flood, human pride found a way to make statues. People made them for those they wished to remain famous and immortal in the world. The Greeks, who have a different view of this origin, say that the Ethiopians invented the first statues, as Diodorus tells us. The Egyptians learned the art from the Ethiopians, and the Greeks learned it from the Egyptians. By Homer’s time, sculpture and painting can be seen to have reached perfection. This is proved by that divine poet’s account of the shield of Achilles. He shows it to us carved and painted, rather than merely describing it, with every form of art. Lactantius Firmianus attributes the origin of the art to Prometheus in a fable. Like Almighty God, Prometheus shaped the image of a man out of mud. Lactantius declares that the art of making statues came from him. But according to Pliny, the art came to Egypt from Gyges the Lydian. Gyges was sitting by a fire, gazing at his own shadow. Suddenly, with some charcoal in his hand, he drew his own outline on the wall. From that time onward, for a while, artists used only outlines, without filling them in with color, as Pliny also confirms. Philocles the Egyptian later rediscovered this method with greater labor. So did Cleanthes and Ardices of Corinth and Telephanes of Sicyon.

Cleophantes of Corinth was the first among the Greeks who used colours, and Apollodorus the first who discovered the brush. There followed Polygnotus of Thasos, Zeuxis, and Timagoras of Chalcis, with Pythias and Aglaophon, all most celebrated; and after these the most famous Apelles, so much esteemed and honoured by Alexander the Great for his talent, and the most ingenious investigator of slander and false favour, as Lucian shows us; even as almost all the excellent painters and sculptors were endowed by Heaven, in nearly every case, not only with the adornment of poetry, as may be read of Pacuvius, but with philosophy besides, as may be seen in Metrodorus, who, being as well versed in philosophy as in painting, was sent by the Athenians to Paulus Emilius to adorn his triumph, and remained with him to read philosophy to his sons.

Cleophantes of Corinth was the first Greek to use colors, and Apollodorus was the first to discover the brush. They were followed by Polygnotus of Thasos, Zeuxis, Timagoras of Chalcis, Pythias, and Aglaophon, all of them celebrated painters. After them came the most famous Apelles, whom Alexander the Great greatly esteemed and honored for his talent. As Lucian shows us, Apelles was also a most ingenious investigator of slander and false favor. Just as Apelles had these gifts, almost all excellent painters and sculptors were endowed by Heaven with poetic talent, as we can read of Pacuvius. In nearly every case, they were also endowed with philosophy, as we can see in Metrodorus. He was as well versed in philosophy as in painting. The Athenians sent him to Paulus Emilius to adorn his triumph, and he stayed to teach philosophy to his sons.

The art of sculpture, then, was greatly exercised in Greece, and there appeared many excellent craftsmen, and, among others, Pheidias, an Athenian, with Praxiteles and Polycletus, all very great masters, while Lysippus and Pyrgoteles were excellent in sunk reliefs, and Pygmalion in reliefs in ivory, of whom there is a fable that by his prayers he obtained breath and spirit for the figure of a virgin that he made. Painting, likewise, was honoured and rewarded by the ancient Greeks and Romans, seeing that to those who made it appear marvellous they showed favour by bestowing on them citizenship and the highest dignities. So greatly did this art flourish in Rome that Fabius gave renown to his house by writing his name under the things so beautifully painted by him in the temple of Salus, and calling himself Fabius Pictor. It was forbidden by public decree that slaves should exercise this art throughout the cities, and so much honour did the nations pay without ceasing to the art and to the craftsmen that the rarest works were sent among the triumphal spoils, as marvellous things, to Rome, and the finest craftsmen were freed from slavery and recompensed with honours and rewards by the commonwealths.

Sculpture was widely practiced in Greece, where many excellent craftsmen emerged. Among them were Pheidias, an Athenian, Praxiteles, and Polycletus, all great masters. Lysippus and Pyrgoteles excelled in sunk reliefs, and Pygmalion in ivory reliefs. A fable tells how Pygmalion prayed for a figure of a virgin he had made, and his prayers gave her breath and life. Painting, too, was honored and rewarded by the ancient Greeks and Romans. They granted citizenship and the highest honors to those who made painting a marvel. The art flourished so greatly in Rome that Fabius brought fame to his family through his paintings. He signed his name beneath the beautiful works he painted in the temple of Salus, calling himself Fabius Pictor. A public decree forbade slaves from practicing painting in the cities. Nations paid such constant honor to the art and its craftsmen that the rarest works were sent to Rome as marvels among the spoils of triumph. The finest craftsmen were freed from slavery and given honors and rewards by their commonwealths.

The Romans themselves bore so great reverence for these arts that besides the respect that Marcellus, in sacking the city of Syracuse, commanded to be paid to a craftsman famous in them, in planning the assault of the aforesaid city they took care not to set fire to that quarter wherein there was a most beautiful painted panel, which was afterwards carried to Rome in the triumph, with much pomp. Thither, having, so to speak, despoiled the world, in course of time they assembled the craftsmen themselves as well as their finest works, wherewith afterwards Rome became so beautiful, for the reason that she gained so great adornment from the statues from abroad more than from her own native ones; it being known that in Rhodes, the city of an island in no way large, there were more than 30,000 statues counted, either in bronze or in marble, nor did the Athenians have less, while those at Olympia and at Delphi were many more and those in Corinth numberless, and all were most beautiful and of the greatest value. Is it not known that Nicomedes, King of Lycia, in his eagerness for a Venus that was by the hand of Praxiteles, spent on it almost all the wealth of his people? Did not Attalus the same, who, in order to possess the picture of Bacchus painted by Aristides, did not scruple to spend on it more than 6,000 sesterces? Which picture was placed by Lucius Mummius in the temple of Ceres with the greatest pomp, in order to adorn Rome.

The Romans themselves held these arts in very high regard. When Marcellus sacked Syracuse, he ordered that a craftsman famous in these arts be treated with respect. And when the Romans planned their assault on the city, they took care not to burn the quarter containing a beautiful painted panel. Later, they carried the panel to Rome with great pomp during the triumph. In time, having, so to speak, stripped the world of its treasures, the Romans brought the craftsmen and their finest works to Rome. Rome became beautiful as a result, gaining more adornment from statues brought from abroad than from those made at home. In Rhodes, a city on an island that is not at all large, more than 30,000 bronze or marble statues were counted. The Athenians had no fewer, while Olympia and Delphi had many more, and those in Corinth were countless. All were beautiful and of the greatest value. Is it not known that Nicomedes, King of Lycia, was so eager to possess a Venus by Praxiteles that he spent almost all his people’s wealth on it? Did not Attalus do the same? To possess the picture of Bacchus painted by Aristides, he did not hesitate to spend more than 6,000 sesterces on it. Lucius Mummius placed the picture in the temple of Ceres with the greatest pomp, to adorn Rome.

But for all that the nobility of these arts was so highly valued, it is none the less not yet known for certain who gave them their first beginning. For, as has been already said above, it appears most ancient among the Chaldæans, some give it to the Ethiopians, and the Greeks attribute it to themselves; and it may be thought, not without reason, that it is perchance even more ancient among the Etruscans, as our Leon Batista Alberti testifies, whereof we have clear enough proof in the marvellous tomb of Porsena at Chiusi, where, no long time since, there were discovered underground, between the walls of the Labyrinth, some terracotta tiles with figures on them in half-relief, so excellent and in so beautiful a manner that it can be easily recognized that the art was not begun precisely at that time, nay rather, by reason of the perfection of these works, that it was much nearer its height than its beginning. To this, moreover, witness is likewise borne by our seeing every day many pieces of those red and black vases of Arezzo, made, as may be judged from the manner, about those times, with the most delicate carvings and small figures and scenes in low-relief, and many small round masks wrought with great subtlety by masters of that age, men most experienced, as is shown by the effect, and most excellent in that art. It may be seen, moreover, by reason of the statues found at Viterbo at the beginning of the pontificate of Alexander VI, that sculpture was in great esteem and in no small perfection among the Etruscans; and although it is not known precisely at what time they were made, it may be reasonably conjectured, both from the manner of the figures and from the style of the tombs and of the buildings, no less than from the inscriptions in those Etruscan letters, that they are most ancient and were made at a time when the affairs of this country were in a good and prosperous state. But what clearer proof of this can be sought? seeing that in our own day—that is, in the year 1554—there has been found a bronze figure of the Chimæra of Bellerophon, in making the ditches, fortifications, and walls of Arezzo, from which figure it is recognized that the perfection of that art existed in ancient times among the Etruscans, as may be seen from the Etruscan manner and still more from the letters carved on a paw, about which—since they are but few and there is no one now who understands the Etruscan tongue—it is conjectured that they may represent the name of the master as well as that of the figure itself, and perchance also the date, according to the use of those times. This figure, by reason of its beauty and antiquity, has been placed in our day by the Lord Duke Cosimo in the hall of the new rooms in his Palace, wherein there have been painted by me the acts of Pope Leo X. And besides this there were found in the same place many small figures in bronze after the same manner, which are in the hands of the said Lord Duke.

Although these arts were held in such high regard, no one yet knows for certain who first began them. As already mentioned, they appear to be most ancient among the Chaldæans. Some credit the Ethiopians, while the Greeks claim the arts began with them. Yet there is good reason to think that they may be even older among the Etruscans, as our Leon Batista Alberti says. We have clear enough evidence in the marvelous tomb of Porsena at Chiusi. Not long ago, terracotta tiles bearing figures in half-relief were discovered underground, between the walls of the Labyrinth. They were so excellent and so beautifully made that the art could not have just begun at that time. Indeed, their perfection shows that the art was much nearer its height than its beginning. Further evidence comes from the many pieces of red and black vases from Arezzo that we see every day. Judging by their style, they were made around the same time. They bear delicate carvings, small figures and scenes in low-relief, and many small round masks. The masters of that age made them with great subtlety. Their work shows that they were highly experienced and excellent in their art. The statues found at Viterbo at the beginning of the pontificate of Alexander VI also show that the Etruscans highly valued sculpture and brought it to a considerable degree of perfection. We do not know exactly when they were made. Yet we may reasonably suppose that they are very ancient and were made when this country was prosperous. This can be judged from the style of the figures, the tombs and buildings, and the inscriptions in Etruscan letters. But what clearer proof could we want? In our own day, in 1554, a bronze figure of the Chimæra of Bellerophon was found during the construction of ditches, fortifications, and walls at Arezzo. This figure shows that the art had reached perfection among the ancient Etruscans. We can see this from its Etruscan style and even more from the letters carved on one paw. There are only a few letters, and no one now understands the Etruscan language. It is therefore conjectured that they may represent the name of the master as well as that of the figure, and perhaps also the date, according to the custom of those times. Because of its beauty and antiquity, the Lord Duke Cosimo has placed this figure in the hall of the new rooms in his Palace. There I have painted the deeds of Pope Leo X. Many small bronze figures in the same style were also found in the same place. They are now in the hands of the Lord Duke.

But since the dates of the works of the Greeks, the Ethiopians, and the Chaldæans are as doubtful as our own, and perhaps more, and by reason of the greater need of founding our judgment about these works on conjectures, which, however, are not so feeble that they are in every way wide of the mark, I believe that I strayed not at all from the truth (and I think that everyone who will consent to consider this question discreetly will judge as I did), when I said above that the origin of these arts was nature herself, and the example or model, the most beautiful fabric of the world, and the master, that divine light infused by special grace into us, which has not only made us superior to the other animals, but, if it be not sin to say it, like to God. And if in our own times it has been seen (as I trust to be able to demonstrate a little later by many examples) that simple children roughly reared in the woods, with their only model in the beautiful pictures and sculptures of nature, and by the vivacity of their wit, have begun by themselves to make designs, how much more may we, nay, must we confidently believe that these primitive men, who, in proportion as they were less distant from their origin and divine creation, were thereby the more perfect and of better intelligence, that they, by themselves, having for guide nature, for master purest intellect, and for example the so lovely model of the world, gave birth to these most noble arts, and from a small beginning, little by little bettering them, brought them at last to perfection? I do not, indeed, wish to deny that there was one among them who was the first to begin, seeing that I know very well that it must needs be that at some time and from some one man there came the beginning; nor, also, will I deny that it may have been possible that one helped another and taught and opened the way to design, to colour, and relief, because I know that our art is all imitation, of nature for the most part and then, because a man cannot by himself rise so high, of those works that are executed by those whom he judges to be better masters than himself. But I say surely that the wishing to affirm dogmatically who this man or these men were is a thing very perilous to judge, and perchance little necessary to know, provided that we see the true root and origin wherefrom art was born. For since, of the works that are the life and the glory of the craftsmen, the first and step by step the second and the third were lost by reason of time, that consumes all things, and since, for lack of writers at that time, they could not, at least in that way, become known to posterity, their craftsmen as well came to be forgotten. But when once the writers began to make record of things that were before their day, they could not speak of those whereof they had not been able to have information, in a manner that there came to be first with them those of whom the memory had been the last to be lost. Even as the first of the poets, by common consent, is said to be Homer, not because there were none before him, for there were, although not so excellent, which is seen clearly from his own works, but because of these early poets, whatever manner of men they were, all knowledge had been lost quite 2,000 years before. However, leaving behind us this part, as too uncertain by reason of its antiquity, let us come to the clearer matters of their perfection, ruin, and restoration, or rather resurrection, whereof we will be able to discourse on much better grounds.

The dates of the works of the Greeks, the Ethiopians, and the Chaldæans are as uncertain as our own, and perhaps more so. We must therefore rely even more on conjecture when judging these works, though our conjectures are not so weak as to be entirely wrong. I believe I was quite right in what I said above about the origin of the arts. I think anyone willing to consider the question thoughtfully will agree with me. I said that nature herself gave birth to the arts, that their model was the beautiful fabric of the world, and that their master was the divine light granted to us by special grace. This light has not only made us superior to other animals but, if it is not a sin to say so, has made us like God. In our own time, we have seen simple children raised roughly in the woods begin to draw on their own. They have done so through the liveliness of their minds, with only the beautiful pictures and sculptures of nature as their models. I trust I can demonstrate this a little later with many examples. How much more, then, may we, indeed must we, confidently believe the same of primitive men? Because they lived closer to their origin and divine creation, they were more perfect and more intelligent. With nature as their guide, the purest intellect as their master, and the lovely world as their model, they gave birth to these most noble arts. From a small beginning, they improved the arts little by little and finally brought them to perfection. I do not deny that one of these men was the first to begin. I know very well that the beginning must have come at some time and from some one man. Nor do I deny that one person may have helped another, teaching him and opening the way to drawing, color, and sculpture. For I know that our art is entirely imitation. We imitate nature for the most part, and then, because no one can rise so high alone, we imitate the works of those we consider better masters than ourselves. But I say with certainty that it is very risky to claim to know exactly who this man or these men were. Perhaps it is not very important to know, as long as we see the true root and origin from which art was born. The works of craftsmen are their life and glory. Yet the first works, and then the second and third in turn, were lost to time, which consumes all things. And because there were no writers then to record the works, they could not become known to later generations in that way either. So their craftsmen were forgotten as well. When writers began to record events from before their own time, they could not speak of things about which they had no information. As a result, the people whose memory had been lost most recently became the earliest people known to these writers. In the same way, Homer is generally said to be the first of the poets. This is not because there were no poets before him. There were, though they were not as excellent, as his own works clearly show. Rather, whatever these early poets were like, all knowledge of them had been lost fully 2,000 years before. But let us leave this subject, which is too uncertain because of its antiquity. Let us turn to the clearer matters of the perfection, ruin, and restoration, or rather resurrection, of the arts. We can discuss these on much firmer grounds.

I say, then, it being true indeed, that they began late in Rome, if the first figure was, as is said, the image of Ceres made of metal from the treasure of Spurius Cassius, who, for conspiring to make himself King, was put to death by his own father without any scruple; and that although the arts of sculpture and of painting continued up to the end of the twelve Cæsars, they did not, however, continue in that perfection and excellence which they had enjoyed before, for it may be seen from the edifices that the Emperors built in succession one after the other that these arts, decaying from one day to another, were coming little by little to lose their whole perfection of design. And to this clear testimony is borne by the works of sculpture and of architecture that were wrought in the time of Constantine in Rome, and in particular the triumphal arch raised for him by the Roman people near the Colosseum, wherein it is seen that in default of good masters they not only made use of marble groups made at the time of Trajan, but also of the spoils brought from various places to Rome. And whosoever knows that the votive offerings in the medallions, that is, the sculptures in half-relief, and likewise the prisoners, and the large groups, and the columns, and the mouldings, and the other ornaments, whether made before or from spoils, are excellently wrought, knows also that the works which were made to fill up by the sculptors of that time are of the rudest, as also are certain small groups with little figures in marble below the medallions, and the lowest base wherein there are certain victories, and certain rivers between the arches at the sides, which are very rude and so made that it can be believed most surely that by that time the art of sculpture had begun to lose something of the good. And there had not yet come the Goths and the other barbarous and outlandish peoples who destroyed, together with Italy, all the finer arts. It is true, indeed, that in the said times architecture had suffered less harm than the other arts of design had suffered, for in the bath that Constantine erected on the Lateran, in the entrance of the principal porch it may be seen, to say nothing of the porphyry columns, the capitals wrought in marble, and the double bases taken from some other place and very well carved, that the whole composition of the building is very well conceived; whereas, on the contrary, the stucco, the mosaics, and certain incrustations on the walls made by masters of that time are not equal to those that he caused to be placed in the same bath, which were taken for the most part from the temples of the heathen gods. Constantine, so it is said, did the same in the garden of Æquitius, in making the temple which he afterwards endowed and gave to the Christian priests. In like manner, the magnificent Church of S. Giovanni Laterano, erected by the same Emperor, can bear witness to the same—namely, that in his day sculpture had already greatly declined; for the image of the Saviour and the twelve Apostles in silver that he caused to be made were very debased sculptures, wrought without art and with very little design. Besides this, whosoever examines with diligence the medals of Constantine and his image and other statues made by the sculptors of that time, which are at the present day in the Campidoglio, may see clearly that they are very far removed from the perfection of the medals and statues of the other Emperors; and all this shows that long before the coming of the Goths into Italy sculpture had greatly declined.

I say, then, that the arts did indeed begin late in Rome, if the first figure was, as is said, the image of Ceres. It was made from the metal in the treasure of Spurius Cassius, whom his own father put to death without hesitation for conspiring to make himself King. Although sculpture and painting continued through the reigns of the twelve Caesars, they did not retain their earlier perfection and excellence. The buildings constructed by successive Emperors show that these arts declined day by day, gradually losing all their perfection of design. Clear evidence of this decline can be seen in the sculpture and architecture produced in Rome during Constantine’s time. The triumphal arch raised for him by the Roman people near the Colosseum is a particular example. Because good masters were lacking, the builders used not only marble groups made in Trajan’s time, but also spoils brought to Rome from various places. Anyone who recognizes the excellent workmanship of the votive offerings in the medallions, that is, the sculptures in half-relief, will also recognize how crude the work of Constantine’s sculptors is. The same is true of the prisoners, the large groups, the columns, the moldings, and the other ornaments, whether made earlier or taken as spoils. By contrast, the pieces made to fill the gaps are extremely crude. These include small marble groups of little figures below the medallions, the lowest base with its victories, and the rivers between the arches at the sides. These are so crude that we can be quite sure sculpture had already begun to lose some of its quality by then. The Goths and the other barbarous and foreign peoples who destroyed Italy and all the finer arts had not yet arrived. It is true, however, that architecture had suffered less harm in those times than the other arts of design. The bath that Constantine built on the Lateran shows that the whole building was very well planned. This is evident even apart from the porphyry columns, the marble capitals, and the double bases at the entrance to the main porch. These were taken from elsewhere and very well carved. By contrast, the stucco, mosaics, and certain wall coverings made by masters of Constantine’s time are inferior to those he had placed in the same bath. Most of these were taken from the temples of the pagan gods. Constantine is said to have done the same in the garden of Æquitius when he built the temple he later endowed and gave to the Christian priests. The magnificent Church of S. Giovanni Laterano, built by the same Emperor, likewise shows that sculpture had already greatly declined in his day. The silver image of the Saviour and the twelve Apostles that Constantine commissioned were very debased sculptures, made without art and with very little design. Anyone who carefully examines Constantine’s medals, his image, and other statues made by sculptors of that time can also see this clearly. These are now in the Campidoglio, and they are far from the perfection of the medals and statues of the other Emperors. All this shows that sculpture had greatly declined long before the Goths came to Italy.

Architecture, as has been said, continued to maintain itself, if not so perfect, in a better state; nor is there reason to marvel at this, seeing that, as the great edifices were made almost wholly of spoils, it was easy for the architects, in making the new, to imitate in great measure the old, which they had ever before their eyes, and that much more easily than the sculptors could imitate the good figures of the ancients, their art having wholly vanished. And that this is true is manifest, because the Church of the Prince of the Apostles on the Vatican was not rich save in columns, bases, capitals, architraves, mouldings, doors, and other incrustations and ornaments, which were all taken from various places and from the edifices built most magnificently in earlier times. The same could be said of S. Croce in Gierusalemme, which Constantine erected at the entreaty of his mother Helena, of S. Lorenzo without the walls of Rome, and of S. Agnesa, built by him at the request of Constantia, his daughter. And who does not know that the font which served for the baptism of both her and her sister was all adorned with works wrought long before, and in particular with the porphyry basin carved with most beautiful figures, with certain marble candlesticks excellently carved with foliage, and with some boys in low-relief that are truly most beautiful? In short, for these and many other reasons it is clear how much, in the time of Constantine, sculpture had already declined, and together with it the other finer arts. And if anything was wanting to complete this ruin, it was supplied to them amply by the departure of Constantine from Rome, on his going to establish the seat of the Empire at Byzantium; for the reason that he took with him not only all the best sculptors and other craftsmen of that age, whatsoever manner of men they were, but also an infinite number of statues and other works of sculpture, all most beautiful.

As I have said, architecture remained in better condition, though it was not as perfect as before. This is not surprising. Great buildings were made almost entirely from materials taken from older ones. Architects could therefore largely imitate the old buildings when designing new ones, since they always had examples before their eyes. They could do this much more easily than sculptors could imitate the fine figures of the ancients, because the art of sculpture had vanished entirely. The Church of the Prince of the Apostles on the Vatican shows that this was so. Its only riches were its columns, bases, capitals, architraves, moldings, doors, and other decorative coverings and ornaments. All these were taken from various places and from the magnificent buildings of earlier times. The same could be said of S. Croce in Gierusalemme, which Constantine built at the request of his mother Helena. It could also be said of S. Lorenzo outside the walls of Rome and S. Agnesa, which he built at the request of his daughter Constantia. Everyone knows that the font used to baptize Constantia and her sister was adorned entirely with works made long before. These included a porphyry basin carved with beautiful figures and some marble candlesticks with expertly carved foliage. There were also some truly beautiful figures of boys in low relief. In short, these and many other reasons show how far sculpture and the other finer arts had declined by Constantine's time. If anything was still needed to complete their ruin, Constantine's departure from Rome supplied it amply. When he left to establish the seat of the Empire at Byzantium, he took with him all the best sculptors and other craftsmen of that age, whatever their abilities. He also took an enormous number of statues and other works of sculpture, all of them very beautiful.

After the departure of Constantine, the Cæsars whom he left in Italy, building continually both in Rome and elsewhere, exerted themselves to make their works as fine as they could; but, as may be seen, sculpture, as well as painting and architecture, went ever from bad to worse, and this perchance came to pass because, when human affairs begin to decline, they never cease to go ever lower and lower until such time as they can grow no worse. So, too, it may be seen that although at the time of Pope Liberius the architects of that day strove to do something great in constructing the Church of S. Maria Maggiore, they were yet not happy in the success of the whole, for the reason that although that building, which is likewise composed for the greater part of spoils, was made with good enough proportions, it cannot be denied any the less, not to speak of certain other parts, that the frieze made right round above the columns with ornaments in stucco and in painting is wholly wanting in design, and that many other things which are seen in that great church demonstrate the imperfection of the arts.

After Constantine left, the Caesars he left in Italy continued to build in Rome and elsewhere. They tried to make their works as fine as they could. But sculpture, painting, and architecture, as can be seen, went from bad to worse. Perhaps this happened because, once human affairs begin to decline, they never stop falling until they can fall no further. Similarly, in the time of Pope Liberius, architects tried to create something great in the Church of S. Maria Maggiore. Yet they did not succeed in the work as a whole. The building, which is also made mostly from materials taken from older buildings, has fairly good proportions. Even so, its frieze above the columns is undeniably lacking in design. The frieze runs around the church and is decorated with stucco and painting. There are also certain other flawed parts. Many other features of the great church show how imperfect the arts had become.

Many years after, when the Christians were persecuted under Julian the Apostate, there was erected on the Cœlian Mount a church to S. John and S. Paul, the martyrs, in a manner so much worse than those named above, that it is seen clearly that the art was at that time little less than wholly lost. The buildings, too, that were erected at the same time in Tuscany, bear most ample testimony to this; and not to speak of many others, the church that was built outside the walls of Arezzo to S. Donatus, Bishop of that city (who, together with the monk Hilarian, suffered martyrdom under the said Julian the Apostate), was in no way better in architecture than those named above. Nor can it be believed that this came from anything else but the absence of better architects in that age, seeing that the said church (as it has been possible to see in our own day), which is octagonal and constructed from the spoils of the Theatre, the Colosseum and other edifices that had been standing in Arezzo before it was converted to the faith of Christ, was built without thought of economy and at the greatest cost, and adorned with columns of granite, of porphyry, and of many-coloured marbles, which had belonged to the said buildings. And for myself I do not doubt, from the expense which was clearly bestowed on that church, that if the Aretines had had better architects they would have built something marvellous; for it may be seen from what they did that they spared nothing if only they might make that work as rich and as well designed as they possibly could, and since, as has been already said so many times, architecture had lost less of its perfection than the other arts, there was to be seen therein some little of the good. At this time, likewise, was enlarged the Church of S. Maria in Grado, in honour of the said Hilarian, for the reason that he had been for a long time living in it when he went, with Donatus, to the crown of martyrdom.

Many years later, Christians were persecuted under Julian the Apostate. At that time, a church dedicated to the martyrs S. John and S. Paul was built on the Cœlian Mount. Its design was so much worse than those mentioned above that it clearly shows that the art was then almost entirely lost. Buildings erected in Tuscany at the same time provide ample evidence of this too. To mention just one, the church built outside the walls of Arezzo for S. Donatus was no better in its architecture than those already mentioned. S. Donatus was bishop of Arezzo and was martyred with the monk Hilarian under the same Julian the Apostate. This can only be explained by the lack of better architects in that age. As could still be seen in our own day, the church was octagonal. It was built from materials taken from the Theatre, the Colosseum, and other buildings that had stood in Arezzo before the city converted to the faith of Christ. The church was built without regard for economy and at the greatest cost. It was decorated with columns of granite, porphyry, and many-colored marbles from those buildings. For my part, I have no doubt that the people of Arezzo would have built something marvelous if they had had better architects. The expense clearly lavished on the church convinces me of this. Their work shows that they spared nothing to make it as rich and well designed as they could. And, as I have said many times, architecture had lost less of its perfection than the other arts. So some small measure of the good could be seen in the church. At this time, the Church of S. Maria in Grado was also enlarged in honor of Hilarian. He had lived there for a long time when he went with Donatus to receive the crown of martyrdom.

But because Fortune, when she has brought men to the height of her wheel, is wont, either in jest or in repentance, to throw them down again, it came about after these things that there rose up in various parts of the world all the barbarous peoples against Rome; whence there ensued after no long time not only the humiliation of so great an Empire but the ruin of the whole, and above all of Rome herself, and with her were likewise utterly ruined the most excellent craftsmen, sculptors, painters, and architects, leaving the arts and their own selves buried and submerged among the miserable massacres and ruins of that most famous city. And the first to fall into decay were painting and sculpture, as being arts that served more for pleasure than for use, while the other—namely, architecture—as being necessary and useful for bodily weal, continued to exist, but no longer in its perfection and excellence. And if it had not been that the sculptures and pictures presented, to the eyes of those who were born from day to day, those who had been thereby honoured to the end that they might have eternal life, there would soon have been lost the memory of both; whereas some of them survived in the images and in the inscriptions placed in private houses, as well as in public buildings, namely, in the amphitheatres, the theatres, the baths, the aqueducts, the temples, the obelisks, the colossi, the pyramids, the arches, the reservoirs, the public treasuries, and finally, in the very tombs, whereof a great part was destroyed by a barbarous and savage race who had nothing in them of man but the shape and the name. These, among others, were the Visigoths, who, having created Alaric their King, assailed Italy and Rome and sacked the city twice without respect for anything whatsoever. The same, too, did the Vandals, having come from Africa with Genseric, their King, who, not content with his booty and prey and all the cruelties that he wrought there, carried away her people into slavery, to their exceeding great misery, and among them Eudoxia, once the wife of the Emperor Valentinian, who had been slaughtered no long time before by his own soldiers. For these, having fallen away in very great measure from the ancient Roman valour, for the reason that all the best had gone a long time before to Byzantium with the Emperor Constantine, had no longer any good customs or ways of life. Nay more, there had been lost at one and the same time all true men and every sort of virtue, and laws, habits, names, and tongues had been changed; and all these things together and each by itself had caused every lovely mind and lofty intellect to become most brutish and most base.

But when Fortune has brought men to the top of her wheel, she often throws them down again, either in jest or in regret. So, after these events, barbarian peoples from various parts of the world rose up against Rome. Before long, they not only humbled the great Empire but brought about its complete ruin. Rome herself suffered above all. With her, the finest craftsmen, sculptors, painters, and architects were also utterly ruined. They and their arts lay buried and submerged among the terrible massacres and ruins of that most famous city. Painting and sculpture were the first to decline, since they served pleasure more than practical needs. Architecture, on the other hand, survived because it was necessary and useful for bodily well-being. But it no longer possessed its former perfection and excellence. Sculptures and paintings showed each new generation the people honored in them, so that those people might live forever. Without these images, the memory of both the people and the arts would soon have been lost. Instead, some memory of them survived in images and inscriptions in private houses and public buildings. These included amphitheaters, theaters, baths, aqueducts, temples, obelisks, colossal statues, pyramids, arches, reservoirs, public treasuries, and, finally, tombs. A great part of these works was destroyed by a barbarous and savage people who had nothing human about them but their shape and name. Among these peoples were the Visigoths. After making Alaric their King, they attacked Italy and Rome and sacked the city twice, sparing nothing. The Vandals did the same when they came from Africa with their King, Genseric. Not content with his plunder and all the cruelties he committed there, Genseric carried the people of Rome away into slavery, to their great misery. Among them was Eudoxia, once the wife of the Emperor Valentinian, who had been killed not long before by his own soldiers. For these soldiers had fallen far from the valor of ancient Rome. All the best men had left long before for Byzantium with the Emperor Constantine, and the soldiers no longer had good customs or ways of life. Indeed, all true men and every kind of virtue had been lost at the same time. Laws, customs, names, and languages had changed. All these things, together and separately, had made every beautiful mind and lofty intellect brutish and base.

But what brought infinite harm and damage on the said professions, even more than all the aforesaid causes, was the burning zeal of the new Christian religion, which, after a long and bloody combat, with its wealth of miracles and with the sincerity of its works, had finally cast down and swept away the old faith of the heathens, and, devoting itself most ardently with all diligence to driving out and extirpating root and branch every least occasion whence error could arise, not only defaced or threw to the ground all the marvellous statues, sculptures, pictures, mosaics, and ornaments of the false gods of the heathens, but even the memorials and the honours of numberless men of mark, to whom, for their excellent merits, the noble spirit of the ancients had set up statues and other memorials in public places. Nay more, it not only destroyed, in order to build the churches for the Christian use, the most honoured temples of the idols, but in order to ennoble and adorn S. Pietro (to say nothing of the ornaments which had been there from the beginning) it also robbed of its stone columns the Mausoleum of Hadrian, now called the Castello di S. Angelo, and many other buildings that to-day we see in ruins. And although the Christian religion did not do this by reason of hatred that it bore to the arts, but only in order to humiliate and cast down the gods of the heathens, it was none the less true that from this most ardent zeal there came so great ruin on these honoured professions that their very form was wholly lost. And as if aught were wanting to this grievous misfortune, there arose against Rome the wrath of Totila, who, besides razing her walls and destroying with fire and sword all her most wonderful and noble buildings, burnt the whole city from end to end, and, having robbed her of every living body, left her a prey to flames and fire, so that there was not found in her in eighteen successive days a single living soul; and he cast down and destroyed so completely the marvellous statues, pictures, mosaics, and works in stucco, that there was lost, I do not say only their majesty, but their very form and essence. Wherefore, it being the lower rooms chiefly of the palaces and other buildings that were wrought with stucco, with painting, and with statuary, there was buried by the ruins from above all that good work that has been discovered in our own day, and those who came after, judging the whole to be in ruins, planted vines thereon, in a manner that, since the said lower rooms remained under the ground, the moderns have called them grottoes, and "grotesque" the pictures that are therein seen at the present day.

But what caused the arts even greater harm than all the causes already mentioned was the burning zeal of the new Christian religion. After a long and bloody struggle, Christianity had finally overthrown and swept away the old pagan faith through its many miracles and the sincerity of its works. It devoted itself with the greatest zeal and care to rooting out every possible source of error. Christians not only defaced or destroyed all the marvelous statues, sculptures, pictures, mosaics, and ornaments of the pagans’ false gods. They also destroyed monuments and honors to countless distinguished people. The noble spirit of the ancients had raised statues and other memorials to these people in public places, in recognition of their exceptional merits. Christians also destroyed the most honored temples of the idols to build churches for Christian worship. To dignify and adorn S. Pietro, they took stone columns from the Mausoleum of Hadrian, now called the Castello di S. Angelo. They took columns from many other buildings that we now see in ruins. This is to say nothing of the ornaments that had been in S. Pietro from the beginning. The Christian religion did not do these things out of hatred for the arts, but only to humble and overthrow the pagan gods. Even so, this great zeal brought such ruin upon these honored professions that their very form was completely lost. As if this terrible misfortune were not enough, Totila turned his wrath against Rome. He razed her walls and destroyed all her most wonderful and noble buildings with fire and sword. He burned the whole city from end to end, and, after robbing her of every living being, left her prey to the flames. For eighteen days in a row, not a single living soul was found in her. He destroyed the marvelous statues, pictures, mosaics, and stucco works so completely that they lost not only their majesty, but their very form and essence. The lower rooms of palaces and other buildings were chiefly where stucco, painting, and statuary had been used. So the ruins from above buried all that fine work that has been discovered in our own day. Those who came afterward, believing the whole site to be in ruins, planted vines over it. The lower rooms remained underground, and modern people have therefore called them grottoes. They have called the pictures still seen in them "grotesque".

After the end of the Ostrogoths, who were destroyed by Narses, men were living among the ruins of Rome in some fashion, poorly indeed, when there came, after 100 years, Constantine II, Emperor of Constantinople, who, although received lovingly by the Romans, laid waste, robbed, and carried away all that had remained, more by chance than by the good will of those who had destroyed her, in the miserable city of Rome. It is true, indeed, that he was not able to enjoy this booty, because, being carried by a sea-tempest to Sicily and being justly slain by his own men, he left his spoils, his kingdom, and his life a prey to Fortune. But she, not yet content with the woes of Rome, to the end that the things stolen might never return, brought thither for the ruin of the island a host of Saracens, who carried off both the wealth of the Sicilians and the spoils of Rome to Alexandria, to the very great shame and loss of Italy and of Christendom. And so all that the Pontiffs had not destroyed (and above all S. Gregory, who is said to have decreed banishment against all the remainder of the statues and of the spoils of the buildings) came finally, at the hands of that most rascally Greek, to an evil end; in a manner that, there being no trace or sign to be found of anything that was in any way good, the men who came after, although rude and boorish, and in particular in their pictures and sculptures, yet, incited by nature and refined by the air, set themselves to work, not according to the rules of the aforesaid arts, which they did not know, but according to the quality of their own intelligence.

After Narses destroyed the Ostrogoths, people lived somehow among the ruins of Rome, though in great poverty. A hundred years later, Constantine II, Emperor of Constantinople, came to Rome. Although the Romans welcomed him warmly, he devastated and robbed the miserable city. He carried away everything that had survived, more by chance than through the goodwill of Rome’s destroyers. But he could not enjoy his plunder. A storm drove him to Sicily, where his own men justly killed him. He left his spoils, his kingdom, and his life to the mercy of Fortune. But Fortune was not yet satisfied with Rome’s suffering. To ensure that the stolen things would never return, she brought an army of Saracens to Sicily, ruining the island. They carried both the Sicilians’ wealth and the spoils of Rome off to Alexandria. This was a great disgrace and loss to Italy and Christendom. So everything that the Pontiffs had not destroyed finally came to a bad end at the hands of that utterly rascally Greek. Above all, S. Gregory is said to have ordered the removal of all the remaining statues and spoils of the buildings. No trace or sign of anything good remained. The people who came afterward were crude and uncultured, especially in their paintings and sculptures. Yet, inspired by nature and refined by the air, they set to work. They did not follow the rules of those arts, which they did not know, but relied on their own intelligence.

The arts of design, then, having been brought to these limits both before and during the lordship of the Lombards over Italy and also afterwards, continued gradually to grow worse, although some little work was done, insomuch that nothing could have been more rudely wrought or with less design than what was done, as bear witness, besides many other works, certain figures that are in the portico of S. Pietro in Rome, above the doors, wrought in the Greek manner in memory of certain holy fathers who had made disputation for Holy Church in certain councils. To this, likewise, bear witness many works in the same manner that are to be seen in the city and in the whole Exarchate of Ravenna, and in particular some that are in S. Maria Rotonda without that city, made a little time after the Lombards had been driven out of Italy. In this church, as I will not forbear to say, there may be seen a thing most notable and marvellous, namely, the vault, or rather cupola, that covers it, which, although it is ten braccia wide and serves for roof and covering to that building, is nevertheless of one single piece, so great and ponderous that it seems almost impossible that such a stone, weighing more than 200,000 libbre,⁴ could have been set into place so high. But to return to our subject; there issued from the hands of the masters of these times those puppet-like and uncouth figures that are still to be seen in the works of old. The same thing happened to architecture, seeing that, since it was necessary to build, and since form and the good method were completely lost by reason of the death of the craftsmen and the destruction and ruin of their works, those who applied themselves to this exercise built nothing that either in ordering or in proportion showed any grace, or design, or reason whatsoever. Wherefore there came to arise new architects, who brought from their barbarous races the method of that manner of buildings that are called by us to-day German; and they made some that are rather a source of laughter for us moderns than creditable to them, until better craftsmen afterwards found a better style, in some measure similar to the good style of the ancients, even as that manner may be seen throughout all Italy in the old churches (but not the ancient), which were built by them, such as a palace of Theodoric, King of Italy, in Ravenna, and one in Pavia, and another in Modena; all in a barbarous manner, and rather rich and vast than well-conceived or of good architecture. The same may be affirmed of S. Stefano in Rimini, of S. Martino in Ravenna, and of the Church of S. Giovanni Evangelista, erected in the same city by Galla Placidia about the year of our salvation 438; of S. Vitale, which was erected in the year 547, of the Abbey of Classi di Fuori, and in short of many other monasteries and churches erected after the Lombard rule. All these buildings, as has been said, are both large and magnificent, but of the rudest architecture, and among them are many abbeys in France erected to S. Benedict, the Church and Monastery of Monte Casino, and the Church of S. Giovanni Battista at Monza, built by that Theodelinda, Queen of the Goths, to whom S. Gregory the Pope wrote his Dialogues; in which place that Queen caused to be painted the story of the Lombards, wherein it was seen that they shaved the back of their heads, and in front they had long locks, and they dyed themselves as far as the chin. Their garments were of ample linen, as was the use of the Angles and Saxons, and below a mantle of diverse colours; their shoes open as far as the toes and tied above with certain straps of leather. Similar to the aforesaid churches were the Church of S. Giovanni in Pavia, erected by Gondiberta, daughter of the aforesaid Theodelinda, and in the same city the Church of S. Salvadore, built by the brother of the said Queen, Aribert, who succeeded to the throne of Rodoald, husband of Gondiberta; and the Church of S. Ambrogio in Pavia, erected by Grimoald, King of the Lombards, who drove Bertrid, son of Aribert, from his throne. This Bertrid, being restored to his throne after the death of Grimoald, erected, also in Pavia, a monastery for nuns called the Monasterio Nuovo, in honour of Our Lady and of S. Agatha; and the Queen erected one without the walls, dedicated to the "Virgin Mary in Pertica." Cunibert, likewise, son of that Bertrid, erected a monastery and church after the same manner to S. Giorgio, called di Coronate, on the spot where he had gained a great victory over Alahi. Not unlike to these, too, was the church that the King of the Lombards, Luitprand (who lived in the time of King Pepin, father of Charlemagne), built in Pavia, which is called S. Pietro in Cieldauro; nor that one, likewise, that Desiderius built, who reigned after Astolf—namely, S. Pietro Clivate, in the diocese of Milan; nor the Monastery of S. Vincenzo in Milan, nor that of S. Giulia in Brescia, seeing that they were all built at the greatest cost, but in the most ugly and haphazard manner.

The arts of design had reached these limits before, during, and after Lombard rule in Italy. They continued to decline gradually, although a little work was still done. Nothing could have been more crudely made or shown less design than the work of this period. Many works bear witness to this decline. Among them are figures above the doors in the portico of S. Pietro in Rome. They were made in the Greek manner to commemorate certain holy fathers who had argued on behalf of Holy Church at councils. Many works in the same manner can also be seen in the city and throughout the Exarchate of Ravenna. In particular, there are some in S. Maria Rotonda, outside the city, made shortly after the Lombards were driven out of Italy. I must mention a most remarkable and marvelous feature of this church. Its vault, or rather its cupola, covers the building and serves as its roof. Although ten braccia wide, it is made from a single piece of stone. The stone is so large and heavy, weighing more than 200,000 libbre,⁴ that it seems almost impossible to have raised it so high. But to return to our subject, the masters of those times produced the puppet-like, crude figures still seen in old works. The same decline occurred in architecture. People still needed to build, but form and good methods had been completely lost. The craftsmen had died, and their works had been destroyed and ruined. As a result, those who took up building produced nothing with grace, design, or reason in its arrangement or proportions. New architects then appeared, bringing from their barbarous peoples the method of building we now call German. Some of their buildings make us moderns laugh rather than bring credit to their builders. Later, better craftsmen found a better style, somewhat like the good style of the ancients. This manner can be seen throughout Italy in old churches, though not ancient ones, built by these craftsmen. It can also be seen in a palace of Theodoric, King of Italy, in Ravenna, and in palaces in Pavia and Modena. All are in a barbarous manner, rich and vast rather than well conceived or well designed. The same can be said of S. Stefano in Rimini, S. Martino in Ravenna, and the Church of S. Giovanni Evangelista. Galla Placidia erected the last in Ravenna around the year of our salvation 438. The same is true of S. Vitale, erected in 547, the Abbey of Classi di Fuori, and many other monasteries and churches erected after Lombard rule. As I have said, all these buildings are large and magnificent, but their architecture is extremely crude. Among them are many abbeys in France dedicated to S. Benedict, the Church and Monastery of Monte Casino, and the Church of S. Giovanni Battista at Monza. Theodelinda, Queen of the Goths, built the last church. Pope S. Gregory wrote his Dialogues to her. In that church, the queen had the story of the Lombards painted. The paintings showed that the Lombards shaved the backs of their heads and wore long locks in front. They dyed themselves as far as the chin. Their garments were made of ample linen, as was customary among the Angles and Saxons, and beneath them they wore a mantle of various colors. Their shoes were open as far as the toes and fastened above with leather straps. The Church of S. Giovanni in Pavia was similar to the churches already mentioned. It was erected by Gondiberta, daughter of Theodelinda. So too was the Church of S. Salvadore in the same city, built by the queen’s brother Aribert. He succeeded Rodoald, Gondiberta’s husband, to the throne. Another was the Church of S. Ambrogio in Pavia, erected by Grimoald, King of the Lombards, who drove Aribert’s son Bertrid from his throne. After Grimoald died, Bertrid was restored to his throne. He also erected a convent in Pavia called the Monasterio Nuovo, in honor of Our Lady and S. Agatha. The queen erected a convent outside the walls, dedicated to the "Virgin Mary in Pertica." Bertrid’s son Cunibert likewise erected a monastery and church in the same manner, dedicated to S. Giorgio and called di Coronate. He built them on the spot where he had won a great victory over Alahi. The church called S. Pietro in Cieldauro was much like these buildings. It was built in Pavia by Luitprand, King of the Lombards, who lived in the time of King Pepin, Charlemagne’s father. So too was S. Pietro Clivate in the diocese of Milan, built by Desiderius, who reigned after Astolf. The Monastery of S. Vincenzo in Milan and the Monastery of S. Giulia in Brescia were also similar. All were built at enormous cost, but in the ugliest and most haphazard manner.

Later, in Florence, architecture made some little progress, and the Church of S. Apostolo, that was erected by Charlemagne, although small, was most beautiful in manner; for not to mention that the shafts of the columns, although they are of separate pieces, show much grace and are made with beautiful proportion, the capitals, also, and the arches turned to make the little vaulted roofs of the two small aisles, show that in Tuscany there had survived or in truth arisen some good craftsman. In short, the architecture of this church is such that Filippo di Ser Brunellesco did not disdain to avail himself of it as a model in building the Church of S. Spirito and that of S. Lorenzo in the same city. The same may be seen in the Church of S. Marco in Venice, which (to say nothing of S. Giorgio Maggiore, erected by Giovanni Morosini in the year 978) was begun under the Doge Giustiniano and Giovanni Particiaco, close by S. Teodosio, when the body of that Evangelist was sent from Alexandria to Venice; and after many fires, which greatly damaged the Doge's palace and the church, it was finally rebuilt on the same foundations in the Greek manner and in that style wherein it is seen to-day, at very great cost and under the direction of many architects, in the year of Christ 973, at the time of Doge Domenico Selvo, who had the columns brought from wheresoever he could find them. And so it continued to go on up to the year 1140, when the Doge was Messer Piero Polani, and, as has been said, with the design of many masters, all Greeks. In the same Greek manner and about the same time were the seven abbeys that Count Ugo, Marquis of Brandenburg, caused to be built in Tuscany, as can be seen in the Badia of Florence, in that of Settimo, and in the others; which buildings, with the remains of those that are no longer standing, bear testimony that architecture was still in a measure holding its ground, although greatly corrupted and far removed from the good manner of the ancients. To this can also bear witness many old palaces built in Florence after the ruin of Fiesole, in Tuscan workmanship, but with barbaric ordering in the proportions of those doors and windows of immense length, in the curves of the pointed quarter-segments, and in the turning of the arches, after the wont of the foreign architects of those times.

Later, architecture made some modest progress in Florence. The Church of S. Apostolo, built by Charlemagne, was small but very beautiful in style. Its column shafts, though made of separate pieces, are graceful and beautifully proportioned. The capitals and the arches supporting the small vaulted roofs of the two aisles are also well made. Together, they show that some good craftsman had survived or had indeed emerged in Tuscany. In short, the church’s architecture was good enough for Filippo di Ser Brunellesco to use it as a model. He followed it when building the Church of S. Spirito and the Church of S. Lorenzo in the same city. The same can be seen in the Church of S. Marco in Venice. This is not to mention S. Giorgio Maggiore, built by Giovanni Morosini in 978. S. Marco was begun under the Doges Giustiniano and Giovanni Particiaco, near S. Teodosio. Work began when the body of that Evangelist was sent from Alexandria to Venice. Many fires badly damaged the Doge’s palace and the church. Finally, in the year of Christ 973, the church was rebuilt on the same foundations. It was built in the Greek manner, in the style seen today, at great cost and under many architects. This was during the rule of Doge Domenico Selvo, who had columns brought from wherever he could find them. Work continued until 1140, when Messer Piero Polani was Doge. As noted, many masters designed the church, and all were Greeks. Count Ugo, Marquis of Brandenburg, had seven abbeys built in Tuscany at about the same time. They were built in the same Greek manner, as can be seen in the Badia of Florence, that of Settimo, and the others. These buildings, along with the remains of those no longer standing, show that architecture was still holding its ground to some extent. Yet it was greatly corrupted and far removed from the good style of the ancients. Many old palaces built in Florence after the ruin of Fiesole also testify to this. Their workmanship is Tuscan, but their design is barbaric. This can be seen in the proportions of their immensely long doors and windows, in the curves of the pointed quarter-segments, and in the shaping of their arches. These followed the customs of the foreign architects of those times.

The year afterwards, 1013, it is clear that the art had regained some of its vigour from the rebuilding of that most beautiful church, S. Miniato in Sul Monte, in the time of Messer Alibrando, citizen and Bishop of Florence; for the reason that, besides the marble ornaments that are seen therein both within and without, it may be seen from the façade that the Tuscan architects strove as much as they could in the doors, the windows, the columns, the arches, and the mouldings, to imitate the good order of the ancients, having in part recovered it from the most ancient temple of S. Giovanni in their city. At the same time painting, which was little less than wholly spent, may be seen to have begun to win back something, as the mosaic shows that was made in the principal chapel⁵ of the said Church of S. Miniato.

The following year, 1013, the rebuilding of the beautiful church of S. Miniato in Sul Monte showed that architecture had regained some of its vigor. The church was rebuilt in the time of Messer Alibrando, a citizen and Bishop of Florence. Besides the marble ornaments inside and outside the church, the façade shows how hard the Tuscan architects tried to imitate the good order of the ancients. They did so in the doors, windows, columns, arches, and moldings. They had partly recovered this ancient order from the very old temple of S. Giovanni in their city. At the same time, painting, which had almost entirely died out, appears to have begun to recover as well. The mosaic in the principal chapel⁵ of S. Miniato shows this.

From such beginnings, then, these arts commenced to grow better in design throughout Tuscany, as is seen in the year 1016, from the commencement made by the people of Pisa for the building of their Duomo, seeing that in those times it was a great thing for men to put their hands to the construction of a church made, as this was, with five naves, and almost wholly of marble both within and without. This church, which was built under the direction and design of Buschetto, a Greek of Dulichium, an architect of rarest worth for those times, was erected and adorned by the people of Pisa with innumerable spoils brought by sea (for they were at the height of their greatness) from diverse most distant places, as is well shown by the columns, bases, capitals, cornices, and all the other kinds of stonework that are therein seen. And seeing that these things were some of them small, some large, and some of a middle size, great was the judgment and the talent of Buschetto in accommodating them and in making the distribution of all this building, which is very well arranged both within and without; and besides other work, he contrived the frontal slope of the façade very ingeniously with a great number of columns, adorning it besides with columns carved in diverse and varied ways, and with ancient statues, even as he also made the principal doors in the same façade, between which—that is, beside that of the Carroccio—there was afterwards given an honourable burial-place to Buschetto himself, with three epitaphs, whereof this is one, in Latin verses in no way dissimilar to others of those times:

From such beginnings, the design of these arts began to improve throughout Tuscany. This can be seen in the work the people of Pisa began on their Duomo in 1016. In those days, it was a great undertaking to build a church with five naves, made almost entirely of marble inside and out. The church was designed and built under the direction of Buschetto, a Greek of Dulichium. He was an architect of the rarest skill for those times. The people of Pisa built and adorned the church with countless spoils brought by sea from many distant places. Pisa was then at the height of its greatness. The columns, bases, capitals, cornices, and all the other kinds of stonework visible there show this clearly. Some of these pieces were small, some large, and some medium-sized. Buschetto showed great judgment and skill in fitting them together and planning the whole building. The church is very well arranged both inside and out. Among his other work, he designed the sloping front of the façade very ingeniously, using a great number of columns. He also adorned it with columns carved in many different ways and with ancient statues. He made the principal doors in the same façade. Buschetto himself was later given an honored burial place between those doors, beside the door of the Carroccio. It bore three epitaphs, one of which is in Latin verse much like other verse of those times:

And seeing that there has been made mention above of the Church of S. Apostolo in Florence, I will not forbear to say that on a marble slab therein, on one side of the high-altar, there may be seen these words:

Since I mentioned the Church of S. Apostolo in Florence above, I should also note an inscription there. These words can be seen on a marble slab on one side of the high altar:

The aforesaid edifice of the Duomo in Pisa, awaking the minds of many to fair enterprises throughout all Italy, and above all in Tuscany, was the cause that in the city of Pistoia, in the year 1032, a beginning was made for the Church of S. Paolo, in the presence of the Blessed Atto, Bishop of that city, as may be read in a contract made at that time, and, in short, for many other buildings whereof it would take too long to make mention at present. I cannot forbear to say, however, following the course of time, that afterwards, in the year 1060, there was erected in Pisa the round church of S. Giovanni, opposite the Duomo and in the same square. And something marvellous and almost wholly incredible is to be found recorded in an old book of the Works of the said Duomo, namely, that the columns of the said S. Giovanni, the pillars, and the vaulting were raised and completed in fifteen days and no more. In the same book, which anyone can see who has the wish, it may be read that for the building of this church there was imposed a tax of one danaio for each fire, but it is not said therein whether of gold or of small coin; and at that time there were in Pisa, as may be seen in the same book, 34,000 fires. Truly this work was vast, of great cost, and difficult to execute, and above all the vaulting of the tribune, made in the shape of a pear and covered without with lead. The outer side is full of columns, carvings, and groups, and on the frieze of the central door is a Jesus Christ with the twelve Apostles in half-relief, after the Greek manner.

The Duomo in Pisa inspired many people throughout Italy, especially in Tuscany, to undertake beautiful projects. As a result, construction began on the Church of S. Paolo in Pistoia in 1032. The Blessed Atto, Bishop of Pistoia, was present, as a contract made at the time records. Many other buildings were also begun, but it would take too long to mention them now. Following the course of time, I cannot leave out the round church of S. Giovanni. It was built in Pisa in 1060, opposite the Duomo and in the same square. An old book of records for the Duomo records something marvelous and almost impossible to believe. The columns, pillars, and vaulting of S. Giovanni were raised and completed in just fifteen days. Anyone who wishes can see the book. It also records that a tax of one danaio was imposed for each hearth to pay for the church. But it does not say whether the danaio was gold or a small coin. The same book records 34,000 hearths in Pisa at the time. This was truly a vast, costly work, and difficult to carry out. The vaulting of the tribune was especially difficult. It was shaped like a pear and covered on the outside with lead. The exterior is full of columns, carvings, and sculpted groups. On the frieze above the central door is Jesus Christ with the twelve Apostles, carved in half-relief in the Greek manner.

The people of Lucca, about the same time—that is, in the year 1061—as rivals of the people of Pisa, began the Church of S. Martino in Lucca from the design of certain disciples of Buschetto, there being then no other architects in Tuscany. Attached to the façade of this church there may be seen a marble portico with many ornaments and carvings made in memory of Pope Alexander II, who had been, a short time before he was elected to the Pontificate, Bishop of that city. Of this construction and of Alexander himself everything is fully told in nine Latin verses, and the same may be seen in certain other ancient letters engraved on the marble under the portico, between the doors. On the said façade are certain figures, and under the portico many scenes in marble from the life of S. Martin, in half-relief, and in the Greek manner. But the best, which are over one of the doors, were made 170 years after by Niccola Pisano and finished in 1233, as will be told in the proper place; the Wardens, when these were begun, being Abellenato and Aliprando, as it may be clearly seen from certain letters carved in marble in the same place. These figures by the hand of Niccola Pisano show how much improvement there came from him to the art of sculpture. Similar to these were most, nay, all of the buildings that were erected in Italy from the times aforesaid up to the year 1250, seeing that little or no acquisition or improvement can be seen to have been made in the space of so many years by architecture, which stayed within the same limits and went on ever in that rude manner, whereof many examples are still to be seen, of which I will at present make no mention, for the reason that they will be spoken of below according to the occasions that may come before me.

Around the same time, in 1061, the people of Lucca began the Church of S. Martino in Lucca, as rivals of the people of Pisa. The church was built to the design of certain disciples of Buschetto, since there were no other architects in Tuscany then. Attached to its façade is a marble portico with many ornaments and carvings commemorating Pope Alexander II. Shortly before his election as pope, Alexander had been Bishop of Lucca. Nine Latin verses give a full account of the portico and Alexander himself. The same account appears in other ancient letters engraved on the marble under the portico, between the doors. On the façade are several figures. Under the portico are many scenes from the life of S. Martin, carved in marble in half-relief and in the Greek manner. But the best scenes, above one of the doors, were made 170 years later by Niccola Pisano and finished in 1233. I will discuss them in the proper place. When work on them began, the Wardens were Abellenato and Aliprando, as letters carved in marble nearby clearly show. These figures by Niccola Pisano show how much he improved the art of sculpture. Most, indeed all, of the buildings erected in Italy from the times mentioned above until 1250 were similar to these. In all those years, architecture seems to have gained or improved little or nothing. It remained within the same limits and continued in the same crude manner. Many examples can still be seen. I will not mention them now, because I will discuss them later as the opportunity arises.

In like manner the good sculptures and pictures which had been buried under the ruins of Italy remained up to the same time hidden from or not known to the men boorishly reared in the rudeness of the modern use of that age, wherein no other sculptures or pictures existed than those which a remnant of old Greeks were making either in images of clay or stone, or painting monstrous figures and covering only the bare lineaments with colour. These craftsmen, as the best, being the only ones in these professions, were summoned to Italy, whither they brought sculpture and painting, together with mosaic, in that style wherein they knew them; and even so they taught them rudely and roughly to the Italians, who afterwards made use of them, as has been told and will be told further, up to a certain time. And the men of those times, not being used to see other excellence or greater perfection in any work than that which they themselves saw, marvelled and took these for the best, for all that they were vile, until the spirits of the generation then arising, helped in some places by the subtlety of the air, became so greatly purged that about 1250, Heaven, moved to pity for the lovely minds that the Tuscan soil was producing every day, restored them to their first condition. And although those before them had seen remains of arches, of colossi, of statues, of urns, and of storied columns in the ages that came after the sackings, the destructions, and the burnings of Rome, and never knew how to make use of them or draw from them any benefit, up to the time mentioned above, the minds that came after, discerning well enough the good from the bad and abandoning the old manners, turned to imitating the ancient with all their industry and wit.

In the same way, the fine sculptures and paintings buried under Italy’s ruins remained hidden or unknown until that time. The people of that age had been crudely raised amid the rough customs of their day. They knew no sculptures or paintings except those made by a few remaining Greek craftsmen. These Greeks made images in clay or stone, or painted monstrous figures, covering their bare outlines with color. As the only people practicing these arts, the Greeks were considered the best and were summoned to Italy. They brought sculpture, painting, and mosaic with them, in the style they knew. They taught these arts to the Italians in the same crude and rough manner. The Italians then practiced them in that style for a time, as I have told and will tell further. The people of those times were not used to seeing greater excellence or perfection than the work before them. So they marveled at it and considered it the best, vile though it was. But the minds of the rising generation became much more refined, helped in some places by the subtle quality of the air. Around 1250, Heaven took pity on the fine minds Tuscan soil was producing every day and restored them to their original condition. After Rome had been sacked, destroyed, and burned, earlier generations had seen the remains of arches, colossi, statues, urns, and columns carved with stories. Yet until the time mentioned above, they had never known how to use or benefit from these remains. The minds that came after them, however, could distinguish good from bad well enough. They abandoned the old styles and turned to imitating ancient art with all their industry and wit.

But in order that it may be understood more clearly what I call "old" and what "ancient," the "ancient" were the works made before Constantine in Corinth, in Athens, in Rome, and in other very famous cities, until the time of Nero, the Vespasians, Trajan, Hadrian, and Antoninus; whereas those others are called "old" that were executed from S. Silvester's day up to that time by a certain remnant of Greeks, who knew rather how to dye than how to paint. For since the excellent early craftsmen had been killed in these wars, as has been said, to the remainder of these Greeks, old but not ancient, there had been left nothing but elementary outlines on a ground of colour; and to this at the present day witness is borne by an infinity of mosaics, which, wrought throughout all Italy by these Greeks, are to be seen in every old church in any city whatsoever of Italy, and above all in the Duomo of Pisa, in S. Marco at Venice, and in other places as well; and so, too, they kept making many pictures in that manner, with eyes staring, hands outstretched, and standing on tiptoe, as may still be seen in S. Miniato without Florence, between the door that leads into the sacristy and that which leads into the convent; and in S. Spirito in the said city, the whole side of the cloister opposite the church; and in like manner at Arezzo, in S. Giuliano and S. Bartolommeo and in other churches; and in Rome, in the old Church of S. Pietro, scenes right round between the windows—works that have more of the monstrous in their lineaments than of likeness to whatsoever they represent. Of sculptures, likewise, they made an infinity, as may still be seen in low-relief over the door of S. Michele in the Piazza Padella of Florence, and in Ognissanti; and tombs and adornments in many places for the doors of churches, wherein they have certain figures for corbels to support the roof, so rude and vile, so misshapen, and of such a grossness of manner, that it appears impossible that worse could be imagined.

To make my meaning clearer, I call works “ancient” if they were made before Constantine. These include works made in Corinth, Athens, Rome, and other famous cities through the reigns of Nero, the Vespasians, Trajan, Hadrian, and Antoninus. By “old,” I mean works made from S. Silvester's day up to that time by a surviving group of Greeks. They knew more about dyeing than painting. As I have said, the excellent early craftsmen had been killed in these wars. The surviving Greeks were old, but not ancient, and all they had left was a knowledge of basic outlines on a colored background. Countless mosaics still bear witness to this today. These Greeks made mosaics throughout Italy, and they can be seen in every old church in every Italian city. They are especially visible in the Duomo of Pisa, in S. Marco at Venice, and in other places as well. The Greeks also continued to make many pictures in this manner. Their figures have staring eyes and outstretched hands, and they stand on tiptoe. Such pictures can still be seen in S. Miniato, outside Florence, between the door to the sacristy and the door to the convent. They can also be seen in S. Spirito in Florence, along the entire side of the cloister opposite the church. Others can be seen in Arezzo, in S. Giuliano, S. Bartolommeo, and other churches. In Rome, scenes run all the way around the old Church of S. Pietro, between the windows. The features in these works look more monstrous than like whatever they are meant to represent. The Greeks also made countless sculptures. Low reliefs can still be seen over the door of S. Michele in the Piazza Padella of Florence, and in Ognissanti. They also made tombs and decorations for church doors in many places. Some of these decorations include figures used as corbels to support the roof. These figures are so crude, vile, misshapen, and coarse in style that it seems impossible to imagine anything worse.

Thus far have I thought fit to discourse from the beginning of sculpture and of painting, and peradventure at greater length than was necessary in this place, which I have done, indeed, not so much carried away by my affection for art as urged by the common benefit and advantage of our craftsmen. For having seen in what way she, from a small beginning, climbed to the greatest height, and how from a state so noble she fell into utter ruin, and that, in consequence, the nature of this art is similar to that of the others, which, like human bodies, have their birth, their growth, their growing old, and their death; they will now be able to recognize more easily the progress of her second birth and of that very perfection whereto she has risen again in our times. And I hope, moreover, that if ever (which God forbid) it should happen at any time, through the negligence of men, or through the malice of time, or, finally, through the decree of Heaven, which appears to be unwilling that the things of this earth should exist for long in one form, that she falls again into the same chaos of ruin; that these my labours, whatsoever they may be worth (if indeed they may be worthy of a happier fortune), both through what has been already said and through what remains to say, may be able to keep her alive or at least to encourage the most exalted minds to provide them with better assistance; so much so that, what with my good will and the works of these masters, she may abound in those aids and adornments wherein, if I may freely speak the truth, she has been wanting up to the present day.

So far, I have thought it right to discuss the beginnings of sculpture and painting, perhaps at greater length than necessary here. I have done this less out of love for art than for the common benefit of our craftsmen. They have seen how art rose from small beginnings to its greatest height, and how it fell from that noble state into utter ruin. They have also seen that art is like other arts and like human bodies, which are born, grow, age, and die. They will now be able to recognize more easily the progress of art’s second birth and the perfection it has reached again in our times. I also hope that, if art should ever fall again into the same chaos of ruin, these labors of mine may help keep it alive. God forbid that such a fall should happen through human negligence, the destructive power of time, or the decree of Heaven. Heaven seems unwilling to let earthly things exist for long in one form. Whatever my labors may be worth, and if they deserve a happier fate, I hope they may at least encourage the greatest minds to give art better help. I hope that both what I have already said and what remains to be said may serve this purpose. Then, through my goodwill and the works of these masters, art may be rich in the supports and adornments it has lacked up to now, if I may speak the truth freely.

But it is now time to come to the Life of Giovanni Cimabue, and even as he gave the first beginning to the new method of drawing and painting, so it is just and expedient that he should give it to the Lives, in which I will do my utmost to observe, the most that I can, the order of their manners rather than that of time. And in describing the forms and features of the craftsmen I will be brief, seeing that their portraits, which have been collected by me with no less cost and fatigue than diligence, will show better what sort of men the craftsmen themselves were in appearance than describing them could ever do; and if the portrait of any one of them should be wanting, that is not through my fault but by reason of its being nowhere found. And if the said portraits were not peradventure to appear to someone to be absolutely like to others that might be found, I wish it to be remembered that the portrait made of a man when he was eighteen or twenty years old will never be like to the portrait that may have been made fifteen or twenty years later. To this it must be added that portraits in drawing are never so like as are those in colours, not to mention that the engravers, who have no draughtsmanship, always rob the faces (being unable or not knowing how to make exactly those minutenesses that make them good and true to life) of that perfection which is rarely or never found in portraits cut in wood. In short, how great have been therein my labour, expense, and diligence, will be evident to those who, in reading, will see whence I have to the best of my ability unearthed them.

But it is now time to turn to the Life of Giovanni Cimabue. Just as he first began the new method of drawing and painting, it is fitting and proper that he should also begin the Lives. In these Lives, I will do my utmost to follow the order of the artists' styles rather than chronology, as far as I can. I will be brief in describing their physical features. The portraits I have collected will show what the artists looked like better than any description could. Collecting them cost me no less expense and effort than diligence. If a portrait is missing, that is not my fault. It is because none could be found anywhere. If someone finds that these portraits do not look exactly like others they may find, I ask them to remember one thing. A portrait made when a man was eighteen or twenty will never look like one made fifteen or twenty years later. In addition, portraits in drawing are never as lifelike as those in color. And the engravers, who cannot draw, always rob the faces of their perfection. They cannot or do not know how to reproduce the tiny details that make portraits good and true to life. Such perfection is rarely or never found in portraits cut in wood. In short, readers will see how much labor, expense, and diligence the portraits cost me. They will see where I have unearthed them, to the best of my ability.