Giotto as Apelles

SOURCE: Notes in the History of Art, 24, 3 (2005) © Norman E. Land Text Text GIOTTO AS APELLES Norman E. Land

picturis suis. t Citing the Ahn (e.o. c. 23-7$ ancient Greel admirable pail of modern tir

sculpendi habr apud grecos et Petrarch is the first to associate Giotto and

the ancient Greek painter Apelles. In his Familiarum rerum (II.5.17), Petrarch explains that ancient authors never describe artists, including Apelles, as beautiful ("formosos"), yet their genius ("ingenium") lives on in descriptions of their paintings. Likewise, Petrarch says, although Giotto was not physically attractive, he painted beautiful works.lA few decades later, Giovanni Boccaccio (Genealogia Deorum XIV.6) speaks of "our Giotto, to whom in his era Apelles was not superior-"noster Ioctus, quo suo evo non fuit Apelles superior."2 Boccaccio does not explain the criteria for his judgment. He simply equates Giotto andApelles: both were great aftists.

Unlike Boccaccio, Benvenuto da Imola (c. i330-c. 1387), who lectured at the University of Bologna, praises Giotto for a specific quality of his art. That praise appeared around 1376 in Benvenuto's commentary on the following famous lines in Dante's Purgatory (XI.94-96): Once Cimabue thought to hold the field as painter; Giotto now is all the rage, dimming the lustre of the other's fame.3

Although Benvenuto's remarks on this portion of Dante's poem are well known to art historians, they have not been examined in relation to the image of Giotto as a new Apelles.

In his commentary, Benvenuto first explains that in addition to Dante two other

authors, Boccaccio and Petrarch, had also praised Giotto.a He then repeats almost ver-

naturali histori

batim Boccaccio's well-known description (Decameron 6.5) of Giotto's ability to imitate nature so convincingly that the viewer of his paintings believes he is looking at an actual person or thing rather than at a repre-

to

sentation.

Macrobius's S a parallel betr

Benvenuto goes on to recount an anecdote about Giotto and Dante. Once, while Giotto was working in the Arena Chapel at Padua, the poet visited him. Seeing several of the painter's children, all of them as ugly

("deformes") as their father, Dante remarked that Giotto's ability to represent attractive figures was not matched by a capacity to make beautiful offspring. Smiling, the painter responded immediately that he created in the light of day but procreated in the dark of night-"Quia pingo de die, sed fingo de nocte." Although Dante recognized that Giotto's reply had its source in Macrobius's Saturnalia (2.2), he nevertheless admired the painter's wit in applying it so readily to the situation at hand.5

Benvenuto closes his comments on Dante's lines by noting that Giotto lived a long life and died in 1336. He also says that Giotto still "holds the field," for no one has outdone him in "subtlety" ("subtilior"), although ceftain authorities say that he sometimes made "great effors" in his works-"Et sic nota, quod Giottus adhuc tenet campum,

quia nondum venit alius eo subtilior, cum tamen fecerit aliquando magnos errores in

Benvenuto's convef ine artists, seems I his story abou the ancient Ror same ans\\'er

the modern

;

ancient painta

mer's appeara are concernedStill, Benve

upon Plinr's

c

own characteri that no one

h.r

ty" might u'e about Giotto's

descriptive ten venuto could b or to his preser both. Anotlpr

echoes Pliny'

35.82-83t abo Pliny tells Rhodes to s*

he kneu' onl-v I

called upon

P

was met b, announced tlr asked Apelles

Apelles took: color on a pan home. seeing

picturis suis, ut audivi a magnis ingeniis." Citing the Natural History of the elder Pliny (a.o. c. 23-79), Benvenuto adds that the ancient Greeks and Romans had more admirable painters and sculptors than those

of ach.

{s

had also almost ver-

rrr description ;ebilitl to imiftat the viewer s looking at an dren rt 3 repre:ount an anece. Once, rvhile rena Chapel at

modern 1i11ss-('151a ars pingendi et sculpendi habuit olim mirabiliores artifices apud grecos et latinos, ut patet Plinium in naturali historia." Benvenuto's closing remark, in addition artists, seems to amplify the implication of his story about Giotto and Dante. Because

whose style embodied a certain "graceful

the ancient Roman painter Mallius made the

same answer to a similar observation in Macrobius's Saturnalia, Benvenuto implies a parallel between the two painters. Giotto,

the modern artist,

is like Mallius,

the

hand.r

35.82-83) about Apelles and Protogenes.

comments on Giotto lived a

Pliny tells us that Apelles sailed to Rhodes to see Protogenes'paintings, which he knew only by reputation.T Once there, he

rnatched by a ,ffspring. Smilunediately that but procreated r pingo de die,

h Dante recogd its source in

e also says that for no one has

'subtilior"), al-

y that he somehis works-"Et tenet campum,

subtilior, cum gnos errores in

defeat.

Pliny (Natural History 35.79) also tells us that Apelles held that he and Protogenes

l). he nevertheit in applying it

y to represent

Apelles. When the latter again visited Protogenes' studio, he drew a third, even more subtle (amplius subtilitarl) line over that of his fellow painter. Later, when Protogenes saw what Apelles had done, he admitted

ancient

to conveying his preference for

ancient painter, but only insofar as the former's appearance and that of his children are concerned. Still, Benvenuto seems to have drawn upon Pliny's discussion of Apelles for his own characterization of Giotto. His assertion that no one had outdone the artist in "subtlety" might well be an astute observation about Giotto's aft, but taken literally as a descriptive term, it tells us very little.6 Benvenuto could be referring to the artist's style or to his presentation of subject matter or to both. Another possibility is that Benvenuto echoes Pliny's story (Natural History,

Seeing several rf them as ugly rr. Dante re-

tilitatem) of the line, he recognized it at once as the work of Apelles. Protogenes then drew a line over the one left by

called upon Protogenes in his studio and was met by the artist's servant. She announced that the master was not in and asked Apelles to identify himself. In reply, Apelles took a brush and painted a line in color on a panel. When Protogenes returned home, seeing the fineness or subtlety (sab-

were equals as artists. Nevertheless, Apelles,

charm" or ue,rrrsra.r, believed that Protogenes did not kno\\' rvhen to take his hand from his pictures and that, consequently, his works suffered from an excess of diligence.8 For Pliny, Apelles' hand-his manner-was both graceful and precise, or subtle.

Benvenuto seems to su_s-gest that, like Apelles, who u as knou n tor the delicate precision of his hand. Giotto imparted a graceful subtletl,to his art. Moreover, again like Apelles, Giotto surpassed all artists of his time in that respect. Where Benvenuto refers to "great errors" in Giotto's rrorks, not only does he humorously allude to the artist's children, but again recalls Apelles, who, as we hear from various ancient "authorities," also made less than perfect paintings.e For instance, Diodorous of Sicily, inhis Fragments (26), says that Apelles and Parrhasius were so skilled at blending their colors that in their hands the art of painting reached its peak. Nevertheless, Diodorous adds, neither artist produced a work above reproach in every respect.'Likewise, Pliny (Natural History 35.85)14ar.etemrSq tells a story about a lowly cobbler who pointed out to the artist that in one of his pictures he had omitted a loop in the depiction of a sandal. According to Claudius Aelianus-Aelian (e.n. 170-

235)-Apelles made a similar kind of error in another of his paintings. In his On the Characteristics of Animals (IV.5), Aelian suggests that Apelles apparently did not know that horses have no lower eyelids and explains that the artist "incurred blame for ignoring this peculiarity in his picture of a horse."'o

In his Liles Plutarch (a.o. 45-125) re-

ports another instance of an error in one of Apelles' paintings, a portrait of Alexander the Great- The artist's mistake was that he made the general's complexion "too dark and ss'arthy." even though Alexander was, "of a fair colour."" Plutarch (Isis and Osiris 360) also says that Lysippus found another defect in the portrait of Alexander just mentioned. This time, however, the error was of another kind. According to Plutarch, Lysip-

pus "was quite right in his disapproval of the painter Apelles, because Apelles in his pofirait of Alexander had represented him with a thunderbolt in hand."'2 Plutarch also believed that Lysippus was correct in representing the general holding a spear" For Plutarch, the truth of Lyssipus's work ensured its enduring honor, whereas the

vainglory implied by the thunderbolt, an attribute of Jupiter, in Apelles' portrait meant its honor would disappear "like smoke in the air." According to Benvenuto, Giotto was, as Antonio Pucci (11 centiloquio, c. 1373) calls him, a "dipintor sottile."r3 Like Apelles, he was greater than any other artist of his time in subtlety, even though he, Iike his illustrious predecessor, sometimes made "magnos

errores."

NOTES 1. Francesco Petrarca, Le Familiari, ed. Vittorio Rossi, 4 vols. (Florence: Sansoni, 1933-1942), ll (1933), p. 39. For the significanoe ofGiotto's appear-

ance, see Norman E. Land, "Giotto as an Ugly Genius: A Study in Self-Portrayal," Explorations in Renaissance CuLture 23 (1997):12-23; reissued in Andrew Ladis, ed., Giotto as a Historical and Literary Figure: Miscellaneous Specializ.ed Studies, Giotto and the World of Early ltalian Art, 1 (New York: Garland, 1998), pp. 183-196. 2. Giovanni Boccaccio, GeneaLogia Deorttm Gentilium, tn Opere in versi, . .. , ed. Pier Giorgio Ricci (Milan: Ricciardi, 1965), p.937 . 3. Dante Alighiei, The Divine Comedy, lI: Purga' tory, trans. Mark Musa (Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin, 1985), p. 121. 4. The Latin text is in Benvenuto da Imola, Comentum super Dantis ALdigherij Comcrdiam, ed. Jacobo Philippo Lacaita, 5 vols. (Florence: Barbdra, 1887), III, pp. 312-j13. There is a translation of this text by John Adams in Laurie Schneidet, ed., Giotto in Perspective (Engtewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 197 4), pp.3t-32.

5. For a discussion of Giotto's wit, see Andrew Ladis, "TIie Legend of Giotto's Wit and the Arena Chapel," inThe Cambridge Companion to Giotto, ed. Anne Derbes and Mark Sandona (New York: Cambridge University Press. 2004), pp. 221-238. 6. I am referring here to Anne Derbes and Mark Sandona, "Giotto Past and Present: An Introduction," in The Cambridge Companion to Giotto, p. 3: "Equally astute is the comment by Benvenuto da Imola" about Giotto's subtlety. 7. Pliny, Natural History, ed. and trans. H. Rackham, 10 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press, 1967-1975), IX, pp.321-322. 8. See Cicero, Orator (XXII.73), who also recounts Apelles' belief that Protogenes was excessively diligent. For Petrarch's response to this story in

Pliny's Natural Hisrory, see Michael Baxandall, Giolto and the Orators: Humanist Observers of Painting in ltaly and the Discovery of Pictorial Composition, 1350-1450 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1911), p.63. See also Baldassare Castiglione's Il Cortegiano (1.28), which was published in Venice tn 1527, where the

crry I ta !E t Forets autlror-

d.f..u

{

ttrabbll flgtryd9 \J-: Prml .{,c[br Mp!!. l0 -{cln ( EaerA- F. Sii lCatriQr-E 1959t-

l- p- Zl'

arnher

rd.I.

disapproval of

:Apelles in his trresented him a Plutarch also rrrect in repreg a spear. For f,sipus's work q, whereas the hmderbolt, an ptles' portrait Erappear "like

Giotto was,

as

I c. 1373) calls & Apelles, he

ilbt of his time Ike his illustrimde "magnos

viL see Andrew h and the Arena 3

inroGiotto,ed. ${or York: Cam'Dt438. ILrbes and Mark :An Introduction," s Giotto, P. 3: b1r Benvenuto da

du-ans. H. Rack-

by

(Cambridge,

r.1967-1975), IX,

I3), who also re-

G was excessiveto this story in -dBaxandall, Giolzrrcrs of Painting

t-l

Composition,

l9rl).

p. 63. See Cutegiano (1.28),

t

1527, where the

author, citing the story of Apelles and Protogenes, defines sprezzatura as the opposite of excessive diligence.

9. For a literal interpretation of Benvenuto's referMillard Meiss, Painting in Florence and Siena after the Black Death (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, l95l), p. 6. See also Anne Derbes and Mark Sandona, "Ciotto Past and ence to Giotto's errors, see

Present," p.239, n.8.

10. Aelian, On the Characreristics of Animals, trans. A. F. Scholfield, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Universiry Press, 1958-

1959),

I, p. 271. Aelian points out that some

say

another painter, Micon, was responsible for this mis-

take.

ll.

Plutarch's Llvas, trans. Bernadotte Perrin,

11

vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, l9l7-1951), VI, pp.23l233.

12. I have used the translation inPlutuch, Moralia, trarc. Frank Cole Babbitt, 15 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,1927-2004), V, p. 59. 13. For the relevant portion of Pucci's poem, see Marvin Trachtenberg, The Campanile of Florence Cathedral: "Giotto's Tower" (New York: New York University Press, l97l), p.206.