Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

IX.-Electoral Statistics. Presented to Parliament by
command of Her Majesty, March 2nd, 1866, .

[merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

. 586

€ 591

THE

EDINBURGH REVIEW,

JANUARY, 1866.

No. CCLI.

ART. I.-1. Contributions to the Literature of the Fine Arts. By CHARLES LOCK EASTLAKE, R.A. London: 1848.

2. Neue Essays über Kunst und Literatur. VON HERMAN GRIMM. Berlin: 1865.

3. Reports of the Commissioners on the Fine Arts. 18411862.

4. Original Treatises dating from the Twelfth to the Eighteenth Centuries, on Painting, &c. Translated by Mrs. MERRIFIELD. London: 1849.

5. Manual of Fresco and Encaustic Painting. By W. B. TAYLOR. London: 1843.

6. The Art of Fresco Painting. By Mrs. MERRIFIELD. London: 1846.

No

OTHING is more remarkable than the zeal with which old wall-paintings are sought after by those who would not go a mile out of their way to see a modern fresco. But the reason of this may be given in a few words. Till Mr. Herbert's 'Moses' was shown to the public, there was no instance in this country of a wall-painting in fresco, water-glass, or encaustic, equal to the easel pictures produced by the same artists, or even by men of less reputation. Whether it was that English painters would not master the difficulties of the fresco process, or that their skill in oils interfered with a new and different method; that the subjects assigned them were foreign to their genius, or the payment offered was too small; it is certain that men whose oil-paintings were generally admired, met with

VOL. CXXIII. NO. CCLI.

B

polite indifference at the best when they turned to fresco. This was not the case in the Italy of early painters. Many of them attained their greatest celebrity, many of them have perpetuated their names, by fresco, and fresco only. Michael Angelo considered oils unworthy of the efforts of a man. The painters who preceded him seem to have toyed with the easier vehicle, and put forth their real strength on the wall. And even such men as Correggio and Parmigiano, whom we generally associate with a softer and less masculine school of painting, cast off these especial attributes when they decorated the churches of Parma. The result is that we scarcely ever find a fresco by an early painter below the level of his easel pictures, while we find many easel pictures of the early painters below the level of their frescoes. Modern times have exactly reversed this sentence.

[ocr errors]

If such be the case, it will strike many who are warm admirers of the early schools, that the attempted revival has proved a failure. So far as fresco is concerned, we fear the verdict cannot be questioned. The great argument in favour of fresco has always been its durability. Its advocates were anxious to impress upon us that the climate of England was no worse than that of Germany, and that the smoke of London would not be more prejudicial to frescoes than the incense and candles of Italian churches. But as a matter of fact the frescoes which have been painted within the last twenty years have already faded and want restoration. Some of the witnesses before the Select Committee on the Fine Arts in 1841, stated that the frescoes painted in the open air at Munich 'seemed perfectly to have resisted the action of the atmosphere.' Twenty years later Mr. Maclise said, in his report on water-glass, that the surface of the fresco painted on the Isar Thor was crumbling away. In the Poets' Hall of the Houses of Parliament the paint comes off in flakes. Mr. Dyce's frescoes in All Saints Church, Margaret Street, have been restored. Parts of his fresco of the Vision of Sir Gala' had' flaked off the wall, leaving bright white specks of uncovered plaster in the upper part before the lower part was finished. If we contrast this condition of our modern frescoes with that of the earliest examples of the art, we find additional cause for wonder. It is true that many of the old frescoes have decayed, but none with such rapidity. Sir C. Eastlake stated in his evidence before the Committee on Fine Arts, that Leonardo's Last Supper,' which was painted in oil, was scarcely visible sixty years after it was painted, and an old Belgian painter quoted by Mrs. Merrifield, tells us that fresco lasts

nine or ten times longer than any other kind of painting, 'the 'more it is exposed to the rain the better it lasts.'* If it is surprising that an oil-painting upon the wall should have faded so much in sixty years as to be almost invisible, what is to be said of frescoes flaking off bodily in less than half that time? We fear that even rain would not have preserved them.

Had the early frescoes faded at this rate there is little doubt that the art itself would have perished. Living three hundred and fifty years after Raphael, what inducement should we have had to master such a difficult process which had not left us any traces of superior advantage? We should have known as much of the early frescoes as we know of the paintings of the Greeks, whom some enthusiasts consider the greatest of all painters simply because we know so little about them. But there is enough left of the very earliest frescoes to tempt us by their example. Even those which are most decayed have done their work, and have lasted for centuries. Vasari tells us of a St. Christopher by Lorenzo di Ricci painted on an outer wall and exposed for many years to the north without losing any of the brilliancy of its colours, or being damaged in any way. In the cases where the early frescoes have not lasted so well there is almost always some reason for the decay. Mr. Wilson, director of the Government school of design at Somerset House, attributes the bad state of Correggio's frescoes in the Duomo at Parma to the painter's use of a rich intonaco, that is, a preponderance of lime to sand. In most of the Italian churches, and particularly in the Sistine, the constant fumes of candles and incense are enough to ruin any picture, and the carelessness of Italian church officials is proverbial.

The most careful inquiry has not succeeded in explaining the decay of our modern frescoes. A commission which was appointed in 1862 examined the plaster on which the frescoes in the Houses of Parliament are painted, and found that it consisted of the proportions of lime and sand adopted in Italy and Germany, and recommended by the modern fresco-painters of the latter country. The artists did not complain of the quality of this composition. No internal dampness in the walls, if any existed, could have reduced the frescoes to their present condition. A series of experiments by Dr. Hofmann proved that gas had nothing to do with the matter. The artists who were examined could give no real explanation.

* Hess said if frescoes were painted in the open air in London the rain would be the best picture-cleaner.' (First Report of the Commissioners on the Fine Arts, 1842.)

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Mr. Maclise said, As far as his observation went, he should 'attribute the apparent decay to the rubbing of the shoulders of the passers-by;' and in proof of this he pointed to the excellent condition of the upper part of his frescoes. But this does not explain the decay of the upper part of Mr. Dyce's • Vision of Sir Galahad.' Mr. Herbert thought the principal cause was the employment of terra-verte-the modern terra-verte being in his opinion different from that of the ancients. But it happens that this is one of the colours recommended for frescoes by Hess, the painter of the Basilica at Munich.

It is certainly not the want of advice that has led to this unfortunate result. We did not engage rashly in fresco-painting, or without sitting down to count the cost. The blue books which deal with the Fine Arts and the Palace at Westminster contain an ample justification of our attempt, as well as a history of our failure. If we begin with the Select Committee which sat in 1841 to receive the evidence of the friends and enemies of fresco, and follow the successive reports of the Commissioners on the Fine Arts, we shall find a most valuable mass of matter of all kinds, artistic, historical, controversial, scientific; much of it contradictory, much of it undigested; but still indispensable for our present purpose. Some of the works we have placed at the head of this article are entirely the products of these reports and of that evidence. The German Essays we have selected as a check rather than a complement; as a means of reducing some of the exaggerated statements we have met with in English pleaders to their real proportions.

The Select Committee on Fine Arts recommended the employment of artists in decorating the new Houses of Parliament, the appointment of a Commission, and experiments in fresco, as English artists had not sufficiently studied the subject. Much of the evidence led necessarily to this conclusion. Sir Charles Barry strongly recommended the employment of fresco, partly on the ground that the greatest painters and sculptors had always lived in those times when the arts of painting and sculpture were directed to the adornment of great public buildings. At the same time he admitted that the corridors were not the most favourable part of the building for the experiment on account of their limited width and their mode of lighting. The next witness was the then President of the Royal Academy, Sir Martin Archer Shee, and his evidence was decidedly unfavourable to the adoption of fresco. He said the great object in the public promotion of art was employ

« PreviousContinue »