There is no occasion here to lose oneself in arguments as to whether the artist was the primal6 cause of the awakening7 of the taste for the antique, or whether it was a mere8 synthetic9 translation of a sentiment already awakened10 through complex causes, the main one being, perhaps, classic literature. Classicism, lately developed into an entirely11 pagan æsthetic sentiment, a combination of Philhellenic and Latin tendencies, may as well have influenced art as life in general—a sentiment that at the moment of its maturity12 aroused anathematic protest from Savonarola and a momentary13 reaction of pietism. However, the preaching of the friar and his colossal14 bonfire of art treasures in Piazza15 della Signoria were mere incidents in the course of Florentine tendencies of art. The Piagnoni in Florence may have converted Botticelli and a few other artists, but the pagan sentiment was not dispelled16. For the artist of the last part of the XVth century San Giorgio and Perseus were, if not identical, to be treated with the same artistic17 sentiment.
The real evolution, in our opinion, begins with Brunelleschi and Donatello. In the year 1404 these two artists undertook a journey to Rome. For the progress of art this is a memorable18 date. The real influence of Greek and Roman art on84 the artistic movement immediately preceding the Renaissance19 begins at that date. It is undeniable that even before this time mythological20 subjects had become familiar to both painters and sculptors21, artists preceding Donatello and Brunelleschi, such as Piero di Giovanni Tedesco, Nicolo di Piero Lamberti (called il Pela) and even Nanni and Antonio di Banco, show slight traces of Roman art at times—even to the way of working the marble, as in the ornaments24 of the north door of the Duomo in Florence, by Giovanni Tedesco—but they are faint and uncertain traits, leaving one undecided whether they be attributable to Roman influence or a mere inheritance from the Romanesque blunt-edged way of working marble.
The years spent in Rome by Donatello and Brunelleschi seem to have moulded the style of these two artists entirely anew, particularly that of the former. The citizens of Rome were more or less surprised at the persistency25 with which the two artists endeavoured to unearth26 fragments of old statues, and supposing them to be animated27 by a mere mercenary hope, that of finding some treasure, they called the two students quelli del tesoro (treasure-seekers). It is undeniably true that however profitable their search for old coins and marble relics28, their copies and study of ancient art were in their sum total more valuable than the solid gold they brought back with them to Florence. The results are plainly visible in Brunelleschi’s architecture and Donatello’s sculpture, and the influence that their art exercised over their contemporaries and followers.
As we have said, after his sojourn29 in Rome, Donatello, particularly, seems to have immersed his art in a bath of past paganism. His art is no fakery, nor is it sheer plagiarism of the antique, but it is all permeated30 with Greek and Roman reminiscences, and comes at times so close to the Græco-Roman art that it misleads connoisseurs31. Speaking of Donatello’s art Louis Courajod, a well-known connoisseur32, observes: “He entered so deeply into the spirit of antiquity33, that some of his restorations of statues are very puzzling,85 and it is difficult to distinguish his handiwork from that of the original.”
In fact the famous horse’s head of the Naples Museum was catalogued as a Greek bronze before it was recently attributed to Donatello or his school. No one can fail to draw a comparison between Donatello’s puttino and the “Infant with the Goose,” a typical example of Græco-Roman art.
One of the first to be affected35 by the new sentiment in art was Lorenzo Ghiberti. As a matter of fact Ghiberti not only became enamoured of the antique, but was seized by the passion of collecting the best antiques in marble and bronze. You may be sure that collectors of this calibre, unlike the Roman samples, talked very little of patina36 and a great deal of form, that their enthusiasm was of a higher alloy37 even than that of present-day collectors, who are rarely artists or even real lovers of art. Polycletus and Lysippus were Ghiberti’s idols38, and Greek art his worship; for the era of Imperial Rome he had no enthusiasm. His cult34 for the Greek went so far as to induce him to reckon time by the Olympiads in his chronology. Instead of telling us that a certain artist died when Martin V was pope, or in the year so and so, Ghiberti states amazingly that the event took place in the 438th Olympiad! It is not surprising that an artist like Ghiberti, and such a lover of Greek art as he was, should be able to classify Greek art at sight, to discriminate39 it from dubious40 Roman products and all the art that so closely resembles certain Greek periods.
That the worship of pagan art was practised by artists with no risk to themselves may be explained by the circumstance that the time of religious intolerance had passed. Intolerance, comprehensible perhaps in the early times of Constantine, when it was a crime for an artist to go to the forms of the past, had gradually sunk into tradition by the dawn of the new era which paved the way to the Renaissance in art and to humanistic tendencies, the most tolerant and unprejudiced period of past civilization.
86 Lovers of art in this period appear to possess a certain refinement41 of feeling that the Romans did not have, they stand more as friends to the artist, esteem42 him more, and thus their pursuit has a wider scope. Even Ghiberti, with all the restrictions43 placed on his taste by his infatuation for the antique, was, according to Vasari who describes his collection, no narrow specialist in the so much praised modern meaning of the word, namely, a collector who may be useful to the history of art and to knowledge at large, but who does not as a rule possess a spark of love for art or artistic feeling.
As is often the case to-day, the heirs of these old collectors were at times more greedy for money than a reputation for art. Many fine collections were scattered44 to the four winds, which was also the fate meted45 out to Ghiberti’s collection by his relatives and heirs. Fortunately a few pieces of this stupendous collection have been saved: a fine torso of a Satyr can now be seen in the Uffizi. There are other pieces too that have come down to us, but the finest works, those attributed to Polycletus, among them a rare ornamented46 vase, are now lost.
The new artistic feeling perpetuated47 itself in architecture from Brunelleschi to Alberti. The latter built for Malatesta what purported48 to be a church, but which is in fact nothing but a temple to Love, which the tyrant49 of Rimini erected50 and dedicated51 to the memory of his lady-love, Isotta Atti. The revolution in sculpture effected by Donatello seems to be felt in Padua and Venice. Imitations of all sorts, and probably faked antiques, date from this time. It is difficult to decide whether Donatello’s genuine pagan sentiment, his second artistic nature, was solely52 due to his passion or to a desire to accommodate the general taste for the antique; Italian artists are far too versatile53. However that may be, he was no faker; the art of the faker flourished when imitators had lost all artistic personality, becoming mere craftsmen54 catering56 as usual to a momentary mania57. Then was the time one saw Filarete indulging in most absurd medals and portraits87 of dubious, very dubious, historical correctness; Riccio in Padua fabricating and flooding the market with charming little bronzes in which the imitation is so evident that it brings up the question as to what the art of Andrea Briesco (called il Riccio) might have been, had he chanced to be born at another epoch58. Vellano also alternates fine pieces of work with little bronzes that must have been in great vogue59 with collectors of antiques. It is to be noted60 that the mania is not confined to Italy, it takes that country by storm because of its tremendous artistic activity and the fact that in art it is the foremost country of the time; but others were affected too. France is the first as being the nearest tributary61 to Italian supremacy62 in art. There are many examples of what we have said, but perhaps one of the most eloquent63 is the decoration of the castle of Gaillon, where there are some medallions with portraits of Roman emperors of a most mystifying character. Though the work of Italians of the end of the Quattrocento they were classified as antique (antiqualles) only a few years later, at the beginning of the sixteenth century.
An evident proof that Quattrocento imitations were not always directed by artistic fancy, but rather by the love of gain by means of fraud and fakery, is given by the fact that some of the statuettes imitating the antique were cast with broken limbs.
The Ambras collection of Vienna has one of these curious specimens—a charming figure, a female nude64. This piece has evidently been cast without arms, the clay model having been mutilated before the form was taken for the cast. In the Prado of Madrid there is also a bronze statue of the Renaissance, possibly a cast from the antique, the peculiarity65 of which is that the arms have been added afterwards, as though in restoration. The metal of the arms is of a different alloy and the modelling of these parts purports66 to be of a much later date than the rest of the statue.
The first pieces to show a positive character of fakery are imitations of old coins and medals. Then small bronzes88 called plaquettes, often pastiches68 of antique models, when not actually reproductions from old cameos.
The Renaissance has also produced many bronze statuettes that seem to have had no other purpose than to take in the amateur—to gratify his demand for antiques by launching spurious products upon the market. The artists responsible for them represent what might be styled the aristocracy of fakers; there is nothing banal69 about them, their work is generally good, so much so that these imitations have now acquired a value per se.
Antonio Pollaiolo, the Florentine sculptor22, is one of the most charming imitators of the antique. The Flute70 Player of the National Museum of Florence is perhaps one of the most convincing examples of this statement. Hercules and Antæus is also a remarkable71 work by this artist, though the other is superior on account of its simplicity72. Of the Flute Player there are copies of the same period in the Cluny Museum and at Avignon. Curiously73 enough this statuette tempted74 even the pencil of Raphael, who reproduced it in a sketch-book now kept in the Academy of Venice.
As soon as he had left the goldsmith’s shop, Andrea del Verrocchio started the early period of his activity in his new career as a sculptor, and made his way, according to Vasari, by casting small figures in bronze. We know very little of these small statuettes of Verrocchio’s, beyond attribution, but, Vasari says, Verrocchio was tempted to make them while in Rome, because he saw how appreciated were antique statuettes, so much so that even fragments fetched fancy prices. Being an excellent craftsman75 with the chisel76, and skilled in the casting of metals, Verrocchio would seem to have been fully77 equipped for catering to the demand of the amateurs of his time.
Vellano, in his imitations of the antique, seems at times to have even been tempted to counterfeit78 Egyptian art. His art in imitating is eclectic and most versatile.
Imitations of the Antique.
By Moderno, XVIth Century.
Andrea Briesco seems to possess the brusque touch of some antique sculptors combined with the mania of Roman89 foppishness in over-draping his statuettes. They are invariably arrayed in gorgeous consular79 armour80, elaborate togas, imperial sandals, and have, as a remarkable contrast, wild, vulgar faces in complete disharmony with the rich decoration of the costumes. However, when this artist models horses or simple nude figures he gets closer to the originals and is evidently an excellent and dangerous imitator. The bronzes of the Paduan school that may, with more or less certainty, be attributed to Riccio, are endless and in some of them the intention of faking is evident.
Jacopo Sansovino, the presumed author of the bronze statuette of Meleager of the Pourtales collection in Berlin, does not seem to take the trouble to disguise the origin of his plagium.
Michelangelo was too great a personality as an artist and too highly gifted to be tempted to hide his genius and waste his fine energies on imitation of the antique. Yet the story of his Sleeping Cupid, sold in Rome as an antique, is very instructive. Though well known it serves admirably to illustrate81 the character of the amateurs contemporary to the great sculptor. The anecdote82 casts a certain justified83 suspicion that the collectors of the Renaissance and early sixteenth century must have been duped on a larger scale than we are led to suppose from the scanty84 information we possess on the subject.
Vasari informs us that Michelangelo sculptured from a piece of marble a life-sized sleeping Cupid, that in this work he had imitated the antique to a surprising extent; so much so that when the work was shown to Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’ Medici the latter advised the sculptor to send the work to Rome and sell it as an antique, as “by this means he could obtain a far better price.” According to Vasari, the Cupid, marvellously arranged and coloured like an old piece of sculpture, was taken to Rome, buried in a vineyard and then “discovered” and sold as an antique to Cardinal85 San Giorgio, who paid 200 ducats for the work (a ducat was worth about 9s.). Vasari adds that the person who had acted as go-90between in the affair tried to cheat Michelangelo by saying that the Cardinal had only paid him 30 scudi (a scudi was worth about 4s.), and he then comments on the Cardinal’s poor taste in not giving the Cupid due consideration after he had discovered that it was modern. He says: “Not recognizing the merit of the work, which consists in perfection, wherein the moderns are as good as the ancients,” the Cardinal did not know how lucky he was to own a genuine work by Michelangelo in the place of heaven knows what poor product of some modest master of antiquity.
Condivi repeats the story, which has given ample food for popular fancy and folklore86, adding that the irate87 Cardinal caused the man to be arrested and, giving him back the Cupid, claimed and received the sum paid for it.
The fact that Michelangelo, who went to Rome in the year 1496, wrote in July, 1496, to Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’ Medici that he had paid a visit to the Cardinal di San Giorgio, shows that the prelate did not bear the artist a grudge88 for the joke. In this letter Michelangelo tells Lorenzo Medici that he has tried in vain to get the Cupid back from Baldassarre Milanese, the dealer89 and go-between in the affair of the Cardinal, but seeing that the man is obstinate90 in his refusal to give back the statue he has been advised to use Cardinal San Giorgio’s authority.
Condivi says that in some unknown way this statue passed into the hands of Duke Valentino, and finally became the property of the Marchioness of Mantua, who owned it at the time Condivi, the historian and Michelangelo’s pupil, was writing.
After the small statuettes, Roman busts92 are a source of some excellent imitations. Of these works, both in marble and bronze, many museums possess good examples. The Uffizi Gallery has two or three good ones; besides these the many restored busts and statues of this same Gallery speak of the characteristic pliability93 and plagiarism in art of the Renaissance. A fine bust91 in bronze of a hypothetical Roman emperor, formerly94 in the collection of Baron95 Davillier, is91 now in the Louvre Museum. It is evidently the work of an artist of the versatile and prolific96 Paduan school.
This very school of Padua, strengthened by the advent97 of Vittore Camelio, Cavino, de Bassiano, and other capable fakers of art—we feel we need not scruple98 to use the word in association with these names—is chiefly responsible for those coins, medals and small bronzes that it would be naive99 to say were made solely for the sake of imitating.
The imitations of bas-reliefs prepared perhaps the popularity of those small bronze bas-reliefs called plaquettes which seem to have meant so much to the collector of the time. We even find the angelic Mino, the last Renaissance artist who should have attempted to paganize his sweetly ascetic100 art, trying his hand at these marble bas-reliefs of Roman emperors, re-edited for the benefit of amateurs. These bas-reliefs already seem to have inveigled101 artists into palming them off with fantastic tales, giving them what might be called a shampoo of history. In the Brunswick Museum there is a bas-relief in marble, evidently aping antique art, representing an Aristotle in an absurd pointed102 headgear and with the following inscription103:—
ΑΡΙΣΤΟΤΕΛΗΣ
Ο ΑΡΙΣΤΟΣ ΤΟΝ (sic)
ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΩΝ
A replica104 of this bronze belonged to Charles Timbal’s collection, and is now in the possession of Monsieur Gustave Dreyfus; a third, with an identical inscription, is kept in the Modena Museum; a fourth is in the Correr Museum of Venice; and, finally, a fifth sample of this fantastic Aristotle is in the National Museum, the Bargello of Florence.
It is certain that there was a companion-piece to this Aristotle, the portrait of Plato, which has come down to us in material other than bronze, but which must have once been the pendant of the Aristotle, as there are clay reproductions of both portraits, the Aristotle being identical to92 the ones already quoted. Of Plato there are several bas-reliefs in marble, one in the Bavarian Museum of Munich, another in the Museum of Arezzo, and another in the Prado. In the latter museum there is also an Aristotle in marble with its freakish head-covering, long hair and a long beard; of Plato there are two marble bas-reliefs, two medallions. In the larger one there is the inscription:—
ΠΛΑΤΩΝΟΣ ΑΘΗΝΑΙΟΥ
A curious fact to be noticed is that of these two portraits Aristotle’s must have caught public fancy more than that of his philosophical105 companion. Not only because of the numerous reproductions of the one original but because it must have been popular already in the time of Louis XII, being reproduced in clay in a medallion of the castle of Alluye at Blois. In this race for popularity in a foreign country and from a spurious origin, Plato seems to have lost nearly half a century, as we find a reproduction in the castle of Ecouen about the middle of the sixteenth century, which landed finally in the Museum of French Monuments, where Baltard renamed it as the portrait of Jean Bullant. No strange transition when one considers that a cast of the original Plato was, for quite a long time, shown in the Louvre as the portrait of Philibert Delorme.
The Louvre has a queer marble medallion, a work of the beginning of the sixteenth century, of a Roman Imperator Caldusius, and a medallion of Cato is now in the Museum of Beauvais.
When Vespasiano da Bisticci tells us that Niccoli “had in his house an infinite number of medals in bronze and silver and gold, and many antique brass106 figures, and many marble heads, and other valuable things,” we can believe that they were genuine, but when it is a question of a later collection of old marble heads, bas-reliefs and medals, we wonder how many an Emperor Caldusius it contained.
This curious trade in and mania for pastiche67 was assisted, it must be added, by the tremendous skill that the artists93 of all periods of the Renaissance seem to have possessed107 in moulding, recasting, and composing one piece from two or three originals.
We know that Verrocchio used to make plaster casts of living people, and the custom of making bust portraits and medallions from death masks was quite common in the Quattrocento and later. Such post-mortem reproductions were often ably disguised by the modelling stick, while at other times they showed only too plainly their ghastly origin.
A regular riot of fakery, combined with the most fantastic metamorphoses of Greek and Roman originals, existed for the benefit of crazy numismatists, greedy collectors of medals and amateurs with a fancy for small bronze bas-reliefs. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the imitation of coins was most varied108; some are quite excellent reproductions of the antique ones, others again show the art and style of the artist and his period but faintly disguised. Some of these latter are at any rate charming works of art. The coins, medals and small bronzes seem to emphasize the Renaissance mania for the antique. Now, for instance, after giving the portrait of Adam, Eve, Noah and Ham, Shem and Japhet, the Promptuarium iconum insigniorum a seculo hominum, published in Lyons by Guillaume Reville (1553), gives other engravings purporting109 to be authentic110 portraits of various personages of antiquity. As a matter of fact many of these portraits are copied from old medals that were circulating at the time, the work of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Mr. Courajod, the former curator of the Louvre Museum, was able to prove this by finding some of the medals from which the portraits of the Promptuarium iconum had been copied. These portray111 Antigone, the lieutenant112 of Alexander the Great, the king of Phrygia, Lysimachus, king of Thrace. The first, an Italian bronze of the fifteenth century, is characteristic for the effort made by the artist to counterfeit the Oriental style he may have noticed, perhaps, in other coins of the time.
But, as we have said, where the fancy of the faker really94 ran riot was in those small bronzes of various origin and still more various purpose, nowadays called plaquettes. These bronzes were sometimes cast from the form of an old cameo, at others they imitated or aped a like origin, and whether they may have been used as buttons, pommels of the hilts of swords, or simply been demanded by collectors, they were for the most part imitations of the antique. In these works the metamorphoses of the original are at times so numerous and so absurd as to puzzle the modern collector and cause him to speculate on the acumen113 of some of the connoisseurs of the past. With some of these small bronzes the metamorphosis is not in the form but in the inscription that sometimes accompanies the plaquette3, but on other occasions the subject and the figures are considerably114 altered. As an example of the former we may quote the supposed portrait of Julius Cæsar of the Courajod collection. In this case the plaquette bears the inscription “Ivllivs C. . Pp . Pm.”, which has caused the wrong naming of this bas-relief, for an identical plaquette, formerly in the collection of Mr. Bardini of Florence, seems to indicate that it must be a question of Cicero. The second inscription runs thus, “M. Tvllivs .C.P.P.P.M.”
As for the second method, the alteration115 of the form and subject of a plaquette, the fancy displayed by the makers116 borders upon the grotesque118.
To begin with a mild form of metamorphosis, let us follow the subject of Apollo and Marsyas in its transformation5 from the original cameo that was in the collection of Lorenzo il Magnifico and, according to Muntz, is now in the Naples Museum, together with many others from the same collection. In this cameo the god is on the right, playing the lyre held in his left hand, Marsyas to the left has his hands tied behind him, between the two figures kneels Olympus (a pupil of Marsyas) interceding119 for his doomed120 master.
The supposed original in the Naples Museum bears but one inscription, “Lavr Med.,” evidently standing121 for Lorenzo Medici, but Ghiberti tells us that on this cornelian “around the said figures were antique letters spelling the name of95 Nero.” There is nothing strange in this, nor in the presupposition that the cameo had been Nero’s private seal, as one knows he was fond of playing the lyre, but what casts some doubt on the authenticity122 of the Naples cornelian stone is the fact that the Berlin Museum possesses a bronze plaquette, evidently a reproduction from some antique cameo, with the inscription to which Ghiberti alludes123, “Nero-Avgvstvs-Germanicvs-P-M-Tr-P-Imp-Pp-.” The cornelian stone kept in the Naples Museum has no inscription and for this reason is supposed by some to be a reproduction from the original ordered by Lorenzo Medici. The plaquette of the Berlin collection is thought to be cast from the original Greek cornelian stone, though there are other reproductions in various museums, one for instance in the Louvre very similar to the one of Berlin, another in the collection of Courajod, with the inscription, “Prudentia. Puritas. Tertiom. Qvod. Ignoro.” Mr. Courajod also owned two more copies of this subject, one similar to the one of the Louvre with the addition of a border, the other of larger dimensions with the figure resting on a ground in the form of a crescent. A bas-relief of this subject, used as an ornament23 of the pommel of a sword hilt and very similar to the other plaquettes was in the Davillier collection. N. Schlifer and Giovanni Boldu (1457) treated the favourite subject with a certain plagiarism of the Greek model. In Boldu’s bas-relief Apollo is in the usual attitude, but the other figure has disappeared.
There are many other plaquettes, with small variations, in private collections. There is also a plaquette of this subject in the Dreyfus collection, in which Apollo has become a woman and Marsyas is playing the flute.
Evidently the subject must not only have been popular among collectors but must have caught the fancy of artists as the composition of Apollo and Marsyas is reproduced in a bas-relief of a fine door formerly in Cremona and now in the Louvre Museum. The one at Naples is repeated almost identically in a cornelian of the Cabinet des Medailles, in a portrait of a young girl, attributed to Botticelli, in the96 Staedel Museum of Frankfurt; on the frontispiece of a work executed for Mathias Corvinus; on a frontispiece of the Sforziade, that rare work kept in the library of the Riccardi in Florence; on a majolica dish of the fifteenth century, now in the Correr Museum in Venice. There is a plagiarism of this subject in a work by Raphael in the Vatican.
The following examples, however, are perhaps more typical of an intentional124 transformation, a somewhat reversed case and an exception to the rule in this sort of faking, namely a Christian125 subject turned into a pagan one for the benefit of the fifteenth-century amateurs. There still exist in San Pietro in Vincoli in Rome, two bas-reliefs representing two incidents in the life of the saint who has given the church its name, one when he is arrested and put to prison, the other when he is chained in his cell and liberated126 by the angels. The two bas-reliefs, wrongly attributed to Pollaiolo, were ordered from some Roman artist in the year 1477 by Sixtus IV, then a simple cardinal. Of each of these bas-reliefs there is a modified reproduction, one in the Louvre and the other in the Victoria and Albert Museum, and the modifications127 of both are such as to make people believe them to be pagan subjects and antique work. In the reproduction kept in the Louvre the transformation of the subject without much alteration of the work is so evident that we can see how easily old collectors were taken in by these curious pieces of truquage. Of a more naive, but no less efficient character is the transformation inflicted128 upon the bas-relief of Kensington. Here in order to transform the miraculous129 liberation of Saint Peter into the freeing of a Roman senator it has sufficed to clip the angel’s wings, both inside the prison—the work being divided into two different moments of the action—and where the saints usher130 the apostle into the street.
Photo:
Alinari
Marsyas
An excellent work by Pollajolo after the antique.
There is no reason to disbelieve the supposition that this piece of faking was perpetrated to cater55 for the mania of the art lover of the time. As a matter of fact the Louvre bas-relief was considered an antique till but recently, and that of the Victoria and Albert Museum, which entered the collection97 wrongly labelled as the work of Ghiberti, was believed, before 1863, when it was acquired by the Museum, to be a work of the classic Græco-Roman period. As for over three centuries they have passed as genuine work of the Roman Empire, it is not reasonable to suppose that the amateurs of the time were wiser than the succeeding generations of connoisseurs who believed the work to be antique. This fact is eloquently131 brought out in the case of the work preserved in the Louvre, as this bas-relief was not hidden but has quite a long and well-established pedigree. Among other migrations132 we can trace it to Malmaison in a sort of select collection of objects coming from Italy. Edme Durand bought it as an antique and in the belief that it was antique kept it in his collection. The Louvre Museum also bought it for an antique and for quite a long time classified it in the catalogue (N. 280) as an Etruscan bronze.
It would take too long to trace all the transformations of small bronzes made for the benefit of the fifteenth and sixteenth-century amateurs, the many reproductions with changes. Of the metamorphoses to which plaquettes were subject we can mention another curious example in which a Crucifixion has become a Rape133 of the Sabines, and as a case in which a popular subject has caused many reproductions, we quote the Palladium of the Niccoli collection which has been reproduced by Donatello, Nicolo Florentino, etc. The statue of Marcus Aurelius also seems to have been a cherished subject for small statuettes from that by Filarete given to Piero Medici in the year 1465 to reproductions of the seventeenth century.
Of all the workmen of that fertile period running between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Moderno was the most active and versatile. There is hardly a mythological subject that has not been treated by him. His imitation of the antique is at times quite convincing, more especially that belonging to the early period of his career. Later on when he enters into what might be styled his matured sixteenth-century temperament134, he seems to suffer from the same trouble as98 the imitators of the first third of the said century, namely, over-polish and mannerism136, which must in fact have been considered an improvement in imitation. Valerio Belli, a sculptor and famous cutter of precious stones and rock crystal, was quite justified in reproducing the subject of his own carving137 in the small bronze bas-reliefs that now play such an important part in modern collections of plaquettes, and which in times gone by must have been the delight also of past collectors. They often bore his signature, which speaks eloquently for the fact that there was no intention to dupe anyone.
There were also other artists who evidently had a hand in faking antiques. They belong more or less to various schools, but chiefly to those of Padua and Venice. The Paduan school is in this respect fortified138 by the names of Vittore Camelio, Cavino, Bassiano. Almost every bronze founder139 is associated with an imitator of the antique, either a maker117 of statuettes, inkstands, perfume vases, or plaquettes of various sizes and use. Thus for a second time Italy became a gorgeous market of imitation, very often in itself such good art as to be worthier140 than the art counterfeited141. One of the last of these imitators was Tiziano Aspetti, to whom, rightly or wrongly, small bronzes of private collections are attributed.
From the Anonimo Morelliano one gathers that there was a period in which a gentleman could hardly afford to do without a little collection of antiques. “The bronze figurines are modern by various masters and are derived142 from the antique,” remarks this Anonimo of Morelli, as though explaining that there were some collectors perfectly143 satisfied with this and perhaps the silent accomplices144 of a fine piece of faking. The Anonimo tells us that there were many such pieces in the collections of either ignorant or accommodating collectors and art lovers, in the house of Marco Bonavido of Padua, and that of a rich merchant of the same city, the sculptor Alviso; in Venice, in the collections of Odoni and Zuanno Ram135. They are often mingled145 with genuine antiques, which fact causes the Anonimo, who evidently thinks himself either a connoisseur99 or a well-informed chronicler, to say here and there, “the many bronze figurines are modern,” or “the many medals are of modern bronze,” or “the medals are most of them antique.” Precious confessions146, as one can see.
We know but vaguely147 of imitations in painting, but an assembly of such versatile artists can hardly have refrained from imitating the work of some master. Besides, the very teacher at the head of a school did not seem to resent it even if a pupil signed the name of his master. But as regards imitating the antique, there were hardly any samples to imitate. The grotesques148 of the old Roman ruins may have suggested to more than one artist a new type of decoration; but this plagiarism, if it can be called so, though not without influence on fifteenth and sixteenth-century art, found no practical issue with fakers.
There is, however, an incident in which a piece of faking saved to Florence a masterpiece of Raphael. It is related by Vasari in Andrea del Sarto’s life. According to Vasari when Frederick II, Duke of Mantua, came to Florence he greatly admired the portrait of Pope Leo X, the magnificent painting now hanging in the Gallery of the Pitti Palace in Florence. His admiration149 turned to such greedy desire of possession that when he reached Rome he begged the then all-powerful Clement150 VII to procure151 it for him. The Pope agreed to the Duke’s request and ordered Ottaviano Medici, then residing in Florence, to have the painting packed and sent to Mantua to Duke Frederick. Ottaviano Medici, a lover of art and a Florentine, hating to deprive his city of such a work, was yet not inclined to resist the wish of the Pope and resorted to a ruse152. He informed the Pope that the painting should be sent to the Duke, according to His Holiness’ orders, as soon as the frame had been repaired. The Duke of Mantua was also informed that the frame needed regilding and that the painting should be shipped as soon as the repairs were finished. With this excuse Ottaviano Medici gained the necessary time and ordered from Andrea del Sarto an exact copy of Raphael’s work, a copy that all experts would100 mistake for the original. The work was done to such perfection that even Ottaviano Medici, who was an art connoisseur, could not tell the original from the copy: the pseudo-Raphael was sent off, the Duke was duped and one of the finest portraits by Raphael was saved to Florence. In Vasari there are comments here and there which lead us to think that many others may have been duped by the versatility153 of the fifteenth and sixteenth-century painters. We know that Bellini’s pupils finished three-quarters of some of the great Venetian master’s works, that Calchar imitated Titian so closely as to be taken for the great Vecelli, but we do not know to what extent lovers of art of the time may have been duped.
As for sculpture, we may close this study by quoting what Vasari writes in the life of Vellano. “So great is the power of counterfeiting154 with love and care any object, that, more often than not, if the style of one of these arts of ours be well imitated by those who delight in the work of whoever it be, the thing that imitates so closely resembles the thing imitated, that no difference can be detected, except by the most experienced eye.”
Of Ghiberti, a collector and versatile sculptor, Vasari tells that “he took much pleasure in imitating the dies of ancient coins and medals.” Which comment amply justifies155 the observation that the learned Milanesi adds to the life of Valerio Belli, who at times, according to Vasari, forgot to add his signature, and was extremely clever in counterfeiting antiques, from which ability “he derived very great benefit.”
“Antique medals,” says Milanesi, “were very much in demand about this time, consequently forgers and imitators abounded156; they had in fact multiplied to great numbers and fostered the art of counterfeiting to its highest perfection.”
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
followers
|
|
| 追随者( follower的名词复数 )； 用户； 契据的附面； 从动件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
plagiarism
|
|
| n.剽窃，抄袭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
plaquette
|
|
| 小匾，小饰板，金属印模 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
4
transformations
|
|
| n.变化( transformation的名词复数 )；转换；转换；变换 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
transformation
|
|
| n.变化；改造；转变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
primal
|
|
| adj.原始的；最重要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
awakening
|
|
| n.觉醒，醒悟 adj.觉醒中的；唤醒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
synthetic
|
|
| adj.合成的，人工的；综合的；n.人工制品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
awakened
|
|
| v.（使）醒( awaken的过去式和过去分词 )；（使）觉醒；弄醒；（使）意识到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
maturity
|
|
| n.成熟；完成；(支票、债券等)到期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
momentary
|
|
| adj.片刻的，瞬息的；短暂的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
colossal
|
|
| adj.异常的，庞大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
piazza
|
|
| n.广场；走廊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
dispelled
|
|
| v.驱散，赶跑( dispel的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
artistic
|
|
| adj.艺术(家)的，美术(家)的；善于艺术创作的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
memorable
|
|
| adj.值得回忆的，难忘的，特别的，显著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
renaissance
|
|
| n.复活，复兴，文艺复兴 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
mythological
|
|
| adj.神话的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
sculptors
|
|
| 雕刻家，雕塑家( sculptor的名词复数 )； [天]玉夫座 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
sculptor
|
|
| n.雕刻家，雕刻家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
ornament
|
|
| v.装饰，美化；n.装饰，装饰物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
ornaments
|
|
| n.装饰( ornament的名词复数 )；点缀；装饰品；首饰v.装饰，点缀，美化( ornament的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
persistency
|
|
| n. 坚持(余辉, 时间常数) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
unearth
|
|
| v.发掘，掘出，从洞中赶出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
animated
|
|
| adj.生气勃勃的，活跃的，愉快的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
relics
|
|
| [pl.］n.遗物，遗迹，遗产；遗体，尸骸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
sojourn
|
|
| v./n.旅居，寄居；逗留 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
permeated
|
|
| 弥漫( permeate的过去式和过去分词 )； 遍布； 渗入； 渗透 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
connoisseurs
|
|
| n.鉴赏家，鉴定家，行家( connoisseur的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
connoisseur
|
|
| n.鉴赏家，行家，内行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
antiquity
|
|
| n.古老；高龄；古物，古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
cult
|
|
| n.异教，邪教；时尚，狂热的崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
affected
|
|
| adj.不自然的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
patina
|
|
| n.铜器上的绿锈，年久而产生的光泽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
alloy
|
|
| n.合金，(金属的)成色 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
idols
|
|
| 偶像( idol的名词复数 )； 受崇拜的人或物； 受到热爱和崇拜的人或物； 神像 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
discriminate
|
|
| v.区别，辨别，区分；有区别地对待 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
dubious
|
|
| adj.怀疑的，无把握的；有问题的，靠不住的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
refinement
|
|
| n.文雅；高尚；精美；精制；精炼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
esteem
|
|
| n.尊敬，尊重；vt.尊重，敬重；把…看作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
restrictions
|
|
| 约束( restriction的名词复数 )； 管制； 制约因素； 带限制性的条件（或规则） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
scattered
|
|
| adj.分散的，稀疏的；散步的；疏疏落落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
meted
|
|
| v.（对某人）施以，给予（处罚等）( mete的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
ornamented
|
|
| adj.花式字体的v.装饰，点缀，美化( ornament的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
perpetuated
|
|
| vt.使永存（perpetuate的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
purported
|
|
| adj.传说的，谣传的v.声称是…，（装得）像是…的样子( purport的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
tyrant
|
|
| n.暴君，专制的君主，残暴的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
ERECTED
|
|
| adj. 直立的，竖立的，笔直的 vt. 使 ... 直立，建立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
dedicated
|
|
| adj.一心一意的；献身的；热诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
solely
|
|
| adv.仅仅，唯一地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
versatile
|
|
| adj.通用的，万用的；多才多艺的，多方面的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
craftsmen
|
|
| n. 技工 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
cater
|
|
| vi.(for/to)满足，迎合；(for)提供饮食及服务 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
catering
|
|
| n. 给养 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
mania
|
|
| n.疯狂；躁狂症，狂热，癖好 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
Vogue
|
|
| n.时髦，时尚；adj.流行的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
tributary
|
|
| n.支流；纳贡国；adj.附庸的；辅助的；支流的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
supremacy
|
|
| n.至上；至高权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
eloquent
|
|
| adj.雄辩的，口才流利的；明白显示出的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
nude
|
|
| adj.裸体的；n.裸体者，裸体艺术品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
peculiarity
|
|
| n.独特性，特色；特殊的东西；怪癖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
purports
|
|
| v.声称是…，（装得）像是…的样子( purport的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
pastiche
|
|
| n.模仿 ； 混成 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
pastiches
|
|
| n.模仿作品( pastiche的名词复数 )；拼凑的艺术作品；集锦；模仿的艺术风格 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
banal
|
|
| adj.陈腐的，平庸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
flute
|
|
| n.长笛；v.吹笛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
simplicity
|
|
| n.简单，简易；朴素；直率，单纯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
curiously
|
|
| adv.有求知欲地；好问地；奇特地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
craftsman
|
|
| n.技工，精于一门工艺的匠人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
chisel
|
|
| n.凿子；v.用凿子刻，雕，凿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
counterfeit
|
|
| vt.伪造，仿造；adj.伪造的，假冒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
consular
|
|
| a.领事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
armour
|
|
| （=armor）n.盔甲；装甲部队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
illustrate
|
|
| v.举例说明，阐明；图解，加插图 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
anecdote
|
|
| n.轶事，趣闻，短故事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
scanty
|
|
| adj.缺乏的，仅有的，节省的，狭小的，不够的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
cardinal
|
|
| n.(天主教的)红衣主教；adj.首要的，基本的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
folklore
|
|
| n.民间信仰，民间传说，民俗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
irate
|
|
| adj.发怒的，生气 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
grudge
|
|
| n.不满，怨恨，妒嫉；vt.勉强给，不情愿做 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
dealer
|
|
| n.商人，贩子 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
bust
|
|
| vt.打破；vi.爆裂；n.半身像；胸部 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
busts
|
|
| 半身雕塑像( bust的名词复数 )； 妇女的胸部； 胸围； 突击搜捕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
pliability
|
|
| n.柔韧性；可弯性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
baron
|
|
| n.男爵；(商业界等)巨头，大王 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
prolific
|
|
| adj.丰富的，大量的；多产的，富有创造力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
advent
|
|
| n.(重要事件等的)到来，来临 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
scruple
|
|
| n./v.顾忌，迟疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
naive
|
|
| adj.幼稚的，轻信的；天真的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
ascetic
|
|
| adj.禁欲的；严肃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
inveigled
|
|
| v.诱骗，引诱( inveigle的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
pointed
|
|
| adj.尖的，直截了当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
inscription
|
|
| n.（尤指石块上的）刻印文字，铭文，碑文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
replica
|
|
| n.复制品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
philosophical
|
|
| adj.哲学家的，哲学上的，达观的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
brass
|
|
| n.黄铜；黄铜器，铜管乐器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
varied
|
|
| adj.多样的，多变化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
purporting
|
|
| v.声称是…，（装得）像是…的样子( purport的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
authentic
|
|
| a.真的，真正的；可靠的，可信的，有根据的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
portray
|
|
| v.描写，描述；画(人物、景象等) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
lieutenant
|
|
| n.陆军中尉，海军上尉；代理官员，副职官员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
acumen
|
|
| n.敏锐，聪明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
considerably
|
|
| adv.极大地；相当大地；在很大程度上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
alteration
|
|
| n.变更，改变；蚀变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
makers
|
|
| n.制造者，制造商（maker的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
maker
|
|
| n.制造者，制造商 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
grotesque
|
|
| adj.怪诞的，丑陋的；n.怪诞的图案，怪人（物） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
interceding
|
|
| v.斡旋，调解( intercede的现在分词 )；说情 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
120
doomed
|
|
| 命定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
authenticity
|
|
| n.真实性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
alludes
|
|
| 提及，暗指( allude的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
intentional
|
|
| adj.故意的，有意（识）的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
liberated
|
|
| a.无拘束的，放纵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
modifications
|
|
| n.缓和( modification的名词复数 )；限制；更改；改变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
inflicted
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
miraculous
|
|
| adj.像奇迹一样的，不可思议的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
usher
|
|
| n.带位员，招待员；vt.引导，护送；vi.做招待，担任引座员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
eloquently
|
|
| adv. 雄辩地(有口才地, 富于表情地) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
migrations
|
|
| n.迁移，移居( migration的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
rape
|
|
| n.抢夺，掠夺，强奸；vt.掠夺，抢夺，强奸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
temperament
|
|
| n.气质，性格，性情 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
ram
|
|
| (random access memory)随机存取存储器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
mannerism
|
|
| n.特殊习惯，怪癖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
carving
|
|
| n.雕刻品，雕花 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
fortified
|
|
| adj. 加强的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
Founder
|
|
| n.创始者，缔造者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
worthier
|
|
| 应得某事物( worthy的比较级 )； 值得做某事； 可尊敬的； 有（某人或事物）的典型特征 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
counterfeited
|
|
| v.仿制，造假( counterfeit的过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
derived
|
|
| vi.起源；由来；衍生；导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
accomplices
|
|
| 从犯，帮凶，同谋( accomplice的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
mingled
|
|
| 混合，混入( mingle的过去式和过去分词 )； 混进，与…交往[联系] | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
confessions
|
|
| n.承认( confession的名词复数 )；自首；声明；（向神父的）忏悔 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
vaguely
|
|
| adv.含糊地，暖昧地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
grotesques
|
|
| n.衣着、打扮、五官等古怪，不协调的样子( grotesque的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
clement
|
|
| adj.仁慈的；温和的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
procure
|
|
| vt.获得，取得，促成；vi.拉皮条 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
ruse
|
|
| n.诡计，计策；诡计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
versatility
|
|
| n.多才多艺，多样性，多功能 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
counterfeiting
|
|
| n.伪造v.仿制，造假( counterfeit的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
justifies
|
|
| 证明…有理( justify的第三人称单数 )； 为…辩护； 对…作出解释； 为…辩解（或辩护） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
abounded
|
|
| v.大量存在，充满，富于( abound的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |