164 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



[May, 



for as the architecture is made up of uniformity, so must tliere be iu the 

 paiuting something which exists in common. It is for this reason we find 

 such simplicity in the composition of Raffaello's " School of Athens," and, 

 indeed, in all liis frescos. This may also account for the simplicity of early 

 painting generally, which was invariably adapted to the purposes of archi- 

 tecture. The artist, indeed, in forming a composition in fresco for architecture, 

 must be guided by all the architectural forms around him ; he is reduced to 

 and forced into the simple style of art, if he wishes to be effective. Tlie finest 

 altar-pieces have all something architectural in their composition which is 

 necessary to harmonize with the columns and the arch which surround the 

 picture. I mention this particularly, as I fear it is a style little known and 

 !ess practised by painters in this country; yet, I dare say, well enough under- 

 stood by architects, who, no doubt, remember tlie nature of tlie composition 

 in the Italian fresco pictures to which I now allude. This style may be the 

 most difficult part of fresco for us to acquire, for certainly it is that wherein 

 Englishmen are inferior to foreigners. In our compositions generally, judging 

 from our Exhibitions, there is little of breadth or simplicity, except in water- 

 colour drawings, which, singular enough, as I found to resemble fresco in 

 colour and effect, so I think they have some of its simplicity of composition, 

 both in landscapes and figures. In oil, on the contrary, composition is lost 

 in a multitude of parts — in fact, Art is studied rather than Nature. 



The Theatre has a greater influence on painting than we are aware of 

 ■which influence must be baneful in every way, for nothing can be more 

 opposed to the purposes we are speaking of than a theatrical taste. In this 

 sense, it is unfortunate to have a theatre so perfect as ours, for the influence 

 extends to both the artists and the pubhc. This taste, carried into fresco 

 ■would be hideous, but I am sure aicliitecture alone will correct it. A strong 

 proof of the theatrical taste existing here in painting, is, that the English 

 prefer Retzch's designs from Faust, to those of Cornelius, or, indeed, any 

 other German works. Now, the slightest glance of an eye practised in his- 

 torical works, woidd find that Retzch's designs are entiiely made up in the 

 tlieatrical taste, and it is on this account they have been preferred by the 

 English, and published here in numerous editions, whilst in Germany they are 

 thought worthless. The grand designs of Cornelius, from the Faust, are not 

 known here at all. So here is a difficulty we really have to get over. There 

 •will be much to unlearn on the part of the public, and much to forego on the 

 part of the artists. 



In the introduction of historical painting in fresco, the difficulty I hear 

 everybody speaking of, is " How are the artists to learn ?" Now it seems, in 

 my opinion, the difficulty is, how are they to uxlearn ; for the going for- 

 ■ward in historical fresco mxist be by going back — and back to the fine old 

 and powerful styles, as we have done in architecture, and in getting sure 

 possession, once more, of the strongholds of Art, which we have lost in the 

 search after novelty. In the desire to be new, we have merely taken what 

 other men have left. We must return back to the fine solid Art, as Reynolds 

 did, and add to his labours correct aiid manly design. Nothing complete or 

 individual (I hate the abused word original) can be attained, if the artist be 

 not well and thoroughly acquainted witli all that has been done in his art ; 

 if be has not seen with his own eyes — aye, and open, too — the whole range 

 of that art which he professes, as Reynolds did ; otherwise he blindly and 

 ignorantly stumbles on some common-place, which has been done better by 

 a hundred others, and which he might have avoided had he allowed himself 

 to know it. I say allowed himself, for the prejudices of painters are prover- 

 bial, and are easy to be seen in an Exhibition, where so many aim at a 

 chimney-corner kind of art, if I may so express it ; for it is local and limited, 

 and made up of servile imitation, without imagination ; and paiuting without 

 imagination is not Art. Of course I allude solely to historical painting. This 

 can never do in fresco painting, but will, in the artist's new life, hang like a 

 millstone about bis neck. 



Rafl'aello, when he began his frescos in the Vatican, looked about him, and 

 embraced and made his own everything that could help him ; we see in his 

 works figures and groups from the Roman antiquities, from Giotto and Mas- 

 saccio, and he even sent young men to Athens to draw the marbles of Phidias, 

 for his object was, to advance the art, rather than himself. 



These remarks apply to the introduction of fresco-painting in this countrj-; 

 for it is so different in all its objects, in all its means, that few can imagine it 

 existing on that slender thread of life which painting now finds here. AVTiat 

 are the combined powers of a modern exhibition to the purpose ? what, but 

 each artist trying the powers of others, instead of his own ; diverging annually 

 from his own proper feeUng in that rage for novelty and fashion which cha- 

 racterizes the age ? and what is the result of these annual thousands of 

 exhibition works, but a positive dram-drinhng at the eye? Such must never 



be the groundwork of fresco, or its failure is certain ; and such, I am sure, it 

 will not be, for every artist will be gratified to have his work remain in the 

 place he painted it for, with the same light and the same object, — things he 

 can never have, or even think of, in an exliibition. 



The immoveability of fresco may, I think, be considered as an advantage. 

 In Italy, certainly, where it exists as part of the building, it defied the French 

 rapacity, for, by Napoleon's orders, every oil picture was removed to satisfy 

 Parisian vanity. It was in vain that many Italian cities endeavoured to ran. 

 som the immortal works of their countrymen : the French took the ransom, 

 and then the pictures. But the frescos remain to uphold Itahan greatness ; 

 they could not be removed without utter destruction, so that the greatest 

 works of M. Angelo, of Raffaello, of Domenichino, Guercino, of Guido, and 

 the Caiacci, stood, and still stand untouched, whilst the oil pictures which 

 went to Paris were mostly injured by the French artists pretending to restore 

 them. The " Transfiguration" of Raftaello alone will prove this fact : it has 

 that glaring French colour, chrome, on many of the lights ; and, indeed, when 

 the present state of the picture is compared with old copies, particularly the 

 mosaic in St. Peter's, it seems to have lost, in French hands, all harmony of 

 colour, all union of light and shade. Now a fresco has no fear of picture 

 cleaning, for the dirt may be easily removed with simple water. Very lately, 

 the Vatican frescos were admirably cleaned with crumb of bread. 



As regards the durability of fresco in this climate, I slioidd certainly be in 

 its favour ; for I have observed that fresco is more destroyed by a dampness 

 arising from the foundation of the building, and in tlie soil, than from any 

 effect of the atmosphere. Indeed, I cannot think the serious decay of the 

 frescos of M. Angelo, Raffaello, and others, at Rome, is satisfactorily accounted 

 for at present. We are told the smoke of the candles, in the Sistine Chapel, 

 has destroyed the " Last Judgment," and that the sack of Rome by the Con- 

 stable Bourbon, was the cause of the early destruction of Rafiaello's frescos 

 in the Vatican, because the German troops made fires in the rooms. Now 

 these assertions fall to the ground, when it is considered that recently the 

 Pauline Chapel (in whicli was performed the ceremony of watching the Host 

 with some thousands of candles,) was cleaned, and M. Angelo's frescos 

 (before invisible from soot) came out quite as well as those in the Sistine 

 Chapel, where the candles are comparatively but few. This is a proof that 

 the smoke is not the cause of the decay. As regards Raffaello's frescos, I 

 have a proof that fire itself does not destroy the fresco material ; so that, in 

 this dilemma, I venture to trace the cause of this singular dilapidation of the 

 finest Roman frescos to the dampness of the soil of Rome, which is beyond 

 what I have observed in other places. As I passed sixteen summers there, I 

 can judge of its pernicious effects, and have no doubt that it attacks the 

 foundations of the buildings, and must in this way cause the decay. The 

 Vatican is unhealthy on this account in the summer, and one cannot sleep 

 there with impunity. This dampness is found not only in the plains, but the 

 hills of Rome, though not equally ; and even at St. Gregorio, on the Celian 

 Hill, the more recent frescos of Guido and Domenichino are decaying. In 

 explaining and accounting for this painful fact, I beg to remark, further, in 

 confirmation of my opinion, that the decay seems more particularly striking 

 in the inner walls, where there is little or no ventilation, whilst the outer 

 walls are comparatively well preserved, as are also the ceilings. This decay 

 in fresco pictures seems confined to Rome, for at Sienna they are admirably 

 preserved. The same at Florence, where, even in the open air, Andrea del 

 Sarto's frescos are in good preservation. Sienna and Florence are dry in 

 their soils, and hence the fact. The modem frescos at Munich also stand 

 well, although the climate is worse than ours ; but the soil is gravel, and so 

 they are hkely to be well preserved, even in the open air. The soil of Lon- 

 don is well adapted to fresco, both as to its nature, as well as the excellent 

 drainage, for our buildings have the singular advantage of dry foundations. 

 We have liaiitable rooms under ground always dry, a thing not to be found 

 in any part of Italy, where even the ground floor, which answers to our 

 parlours, is scarcely habitable. The floors under ground are always cellars, 

 and have to be entered with great caution, on account of the damp. No doubt 

 the ancient Romans must have had a system of drainage similar to ours, to 

 have made their city so different from the present, as regards health. I 

 believe most of the old specimens of our early frescos are in good preserva- 

 tion, considering the way they have been treated — first with disdain, and 

 then with whitewash. 



As applicable to England, I would also say, that the durability of fresco 

 against fire is not one of its least advantages. This was proved at Florence, 

 where, after the church of the Carmine was burnt down, and they commenced 

 clearing away the ruins, Massaccio's frescos were found to be entire, and they 

 exist on the same walls to this day ; whereas, at Venice,5;the^ greatestworks 



