Page:Vasari - Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, volume 1.djvu/316

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
302
introduction to

explication of my purpose and intention, with the reasons which have led me to divide this collection of Lives into Three Parts.

It is an indubitable fact, that distinction in the arts is attained by one man through his diligent practice; by another, from his profound study; a third seeks it in imitation; a fourth, by the acquirement of knowledge in the sciences, which all offer aid to the arts; others arrive at the desired end by the union of many of these; some by the possession of all united. But as I have sufficiently discoursed, in the lives of various masters, of the modes, processes, and causes of all sorts, which have contributed to the good, the better, or the excellent results of their labours, so I will here discuss these matters in more general terms, and insist, rather, on the qualities which characterize periods, than on those which distinguish individuals. To avoid a too minute inquiry, I adopt the division into three parts, or periods—if we so please to call them—from the revival of the arts, down to the present century, and in each of these there will be found a very obvious difference. In the first, and most ancient, of these periods, we have seen that the three formative arts were very far from their perfection; and that, if it must be admitted that they had much in them that was good, yet this was accompanied by so much of imperfection, that those times certainly merit no great share of commendation. Yet, on the other hand, as it is by them that the commencement was made; as it was they who originated the method, and taught the way to the better path, which was afterwards followed, so, if it were but for this, we are bound to say nothing of them but what is good—nay, we must even accord to them a somewhat larger amount of glory than they might have the right to demand, were their works to be judged rigidly by the strict rules of art.[1]

In the second period, all productions were, obviously, much ameliorated; richer invention was displayed, with more correct drawing, a better manner, improved execution, and more careful finish. The arts were, in a measure, delivered from that rust of old age, and that coarse disproportion, which the

  1. The praises which the author had previously bestowed on the works of the first period, and which might seem excessive, are here justified, and moderated at the same time. —Ed. Flor. of 1832-8.