Spanish Art Treatises of the Seventeenth Century (Appendix to the Review of 'Teoría de la Pintura del Siglo de Oro' by Francisco Calvo Serraller) Part One

Translation by Francesco Mazzaferro
CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION

Giovanni Mazzaferro
Spanish Art Treatises of the Seventeenth Century
(Appendix to the Review of Teoría de la Pintura del Siglo de Oro by Francisco Calvo Serraller)
Part One

Vicente Carducho, The Victory of Fleurus, 1634, Madrid, Museo del Prado

In 1981 Francisco Calvo Serraller published in Madrid a highly successful anthology entitled Teoría de la Pintura del Siglo de Oro (Theory of Painting in the Golden Age), which marked a clear break with the way scholars had previously considered the sources of Iberian art history, both in Spain and outside it. In a historical perspective - as we should not forget - Spain was still a very young democracy when Calvo Serraller released his work. Francisco Franco had just died six years before and decades of regime had, on the one hand, fed a nationalist rhetoric in Spanish art criticism and, on the other hand, created great difficulty to those who wished to study the art evolution of the Iberian peninsula, a difficulty that, in the field of art literature, had resulted in a substantial disinterest. In practice, until Calvo Serraller’s work it was believed that the art treatises written in Spain were nothing but a replication of those clichés already included in the Italian treatises, without any substantial originality of ideas.

I have already reviewed Calvo Serraller’s anthology on this blog, but I did it in general terms. Recently, I read a text edited by José Riello («Sacar de la sombra lumbre». La teoría de la pintura en el Siglo de Oro (1560-1724) i.e. «Get fire out of shadow».The theory of painting in the golden age) that deliberately, and from its title, was a tribute to the book of the Spanish historian. In essence, it consists of the proceedings of the monographic lectures with the same name, held at the Prado Museum in 2010 in order to celebrate the thirty years of the publication of Calvo Serraller’s work. The lectures provided a very clear perception of the role that book has played. In particular, it is clear that the work in question indeed initiated an intense season of studies and publications that led to the publication of numerous critical editions dedicated precisely to the Spanish treaties. Within the limits of my strength and of my personal difficulty commanding the language in full, I have tried to give an account of these critical editions in the blog.

I still have the impression that all of this is largely unknown in Italy (and in many other countries too). Spain is the country that, in terms of art literature studies, has made major strides in recent years. So I decided to take a step back. You will find below some brief information about the various treatises present in the anthology by Calvo Serraller. Then I will not fail to refer to the critical editions which were published later, so that one can grasp in a clear manner the change of pace that occurred from 1981 onwards. 

Francisco de Zurbarán, Saint Peter Nolasco Recovering the Image of the Virgin of El Puig,
1630, Cincinnati Art Museum
Source: http://www.arte.it/foto/a-ferrara-le-opere-di-francisco-de-zumbar%C3%A0n-il-caravaggio-spagnolo-51/10

Gaspar Gutiérrez de los Ríos, 

Noticia general para la estimación de las artes... 
[General News for the Assessment of the Arts] (1600)

The full title, published in Madrid in 1600, is Noticia general para la estimación de las artes, y de la manera en que se conocen las liberales de las que son mecánicas y serviles, con una exortación a la honra de la virtud y del trabajo contra los ociosos, y otras particulares para las personas de todos estados. In English, it means: “General news for the estimation of the arts, and how to differentiate liberal arts from mechanical and unskilled arts, with an exhortation to honor virtue and work against indolence, and other specific issues for people of all levels.”

It was a text that tried to organize a theoretical system within which plastic arts can find a distinct and separate role. One of the most characteristic aspects of the Spanish Seventeenth century was the defence of the liberal nature of painting. Sometimes this defence was derived from tax-related questions, but very often it was a specific claim, motivated by the desire to stand out compared with simple mechanical workers. In this case, the fact that the author was a lawyer led to the assumption that his work should be seen as the result of a series of tax disputes involving architects. As we shall see, there were indeed such situations. And yet, in the text there is no precise reference to any court cause that might have given rise to the drafting of the treatise.

The work was published in a modern critical edition in 2006, edited by José María Cervelló Grande (Gaspar Gutiérrez de los Ríos y su Noticia general para la estimación de la artes - Gaspar Gutiérrez de los Ríos and his general news on the estimation of arts, 2006).

Pablo de Céspedes

Discurso de la comparación de la antigua y moderna pintura y escultura... (1604) e Poema de la pintura 
[Discourse on the comparison between antique and modern painting and sculpture…) (1604) and Poem of painting]

We do not know much about Pablo de Céspedes, and his importance for the transmission and transposition of some classical themes of Italian art literature into the Spanish area, as well as their revision in the Iberian context. We know that Pablo lived and worked a few years in Italy (this is also mentioned by Baglione in his Le vite de’ pittori, scultori et architetti - Lives of painters, sculptors, and architects - cf. Vol. 1 p. 30 of the Hess-Röttgen edition). Moreover, we are aware that he was a great admirer of Michelangelo and Raphael, as well as a friend of Federico Zuccari. In addition to painting, he acted for long time as Racionero (Chief Accountant) of the Cathedral of Cordoba, where he died in 1608 (so that very often it is cited as racionero Céspedes). In fact, the assessment of his theoretical writings was made difficult by the fact that they have been lost. Only a few fragments of various works are known; fortunately for us, they were published by Francisco Pacheco inside his Arte de la Pintura (Art of Painting). The fragments were then reassembled as much as possible, and published by Juan Agustin Cean Bermudez in his Diccionario histórico de los más ilustres profesores de las Bellas Artes en España (Historic Dictionary of the most illustrious professors of Fine Arts in Spain) (1800). Francisco Calvo Serraller has extracted, from Cean Bermudez’s Diccionario, excerpts from the Discurso de la comparación de la antigua y moderna pintura y escultura and from the Poema de la Pintura. 

According to our knowledge to date, Pablo de Céspedes actually wrote at least four texts of theoretical interest: (i) the Discurso de la comparación de la antigua y moderna pintura y escultura, donde se trata de la excelencia de las obras de los antiguos, y si se aventajaban a la de los modernos (1604), (ii) a Discurso sobre el templo de Salomón (Discourse on the Temple of Solomon), (iii) the Poema de la pintura, and a (iv) Carta sobre la pintura a Francisco Pacheco (Notice on painting, dedicated to Francisco Pacheco) (1608).

"Certainly, the art and ideas of Céspedes contain many connections with the second half of the sixteenth century, and yet their prospect is in good part oriented toward the seventeenth century” (p. 37). From a more detailed study of his texts, then, it will certainly possible to recognize some themes which were dear to the Italian art literature of the sixteenth century, as the issue of the comparison between the arts, the superiority between ancient and modern art, the grotesque, the classical orders in architecture and so away, but it will also possible to "analyse with some rigor the educational value of his humanist culture and the specific meaning of his views on naturalism and the historical evolution of taste" (p. 89).

Diego Velázquez, Prince Baltasar Carlos on Horseback, 1635, Prado Museum, Madrid
Sorce: Wikimedia Commons

José de Sigüenza

Tercera parte de la historia de la Orden de San Gerónimo 
[Third part of the history of the Order of St. Jerome] (1605)

Fray (Brother) José de Sigüenza was the author of a monumental Historia de la Orden de San Jerónimo, published in three parts between 1595 and 1605. The third part is the most interesting for us; it was published in four books in Madrid in 1605 (it was however finished writing in 1602); in it the third and fourth book were, in fact, exclusively dedicated to the Monastery of San Lorenzo de El Escorial (where the monk lived between 1590 and 1606, the year of his death); they retraced the history of the building, described the functional and organizational aspects, but above all provided a summary of the most precious art collection that Philip II was creating there in those years.

According to Calvo Serraller, the pages of Brother Jose have exceptional specificities, for more than one reason. First of all, they differentiate themselves from the genre of the theoretical treatise, where very often there was a lack of direct critical judgment on the work of art, while Sigüenza showed a particular freedom and flexibility exactly in front of the canvases. Second, it was not the assessment of a layman, but of a person who, despite having never been to Italy, proved to be aware of the great treatises of the Sixteenth century, and not just of Vasari's Lives, but also of those of Mannerist orientation, as Lomazzo and Armenini, and writers who have taken controversial positions relative to Vasari himself, as Pino or Dolce. Third, it was the testimony of a man who had made personal acquaintance of many of the architects who worked at the time in the Escorial rooms. Finally, in his judgments, which are for example particularly attentive to the work of Bosch, we can identify the trace of the progressive "consolidation of a "Spanish style", which subsequently assumed its final configuration, both in theoretical as in plastic terms. This is the case, at least, of his defence of the valiente [courageous] painting and his veiled apologies of colour, of chiaroscuro, the fluency of touch in realist painting, etc., not to speak of the importance that is given to imagination, introspection, and especially satire as the main moral element in artistic creation. They play a crucial role in the cited case of the assessment on Bosch, a painter traditionally appreciated by the Spaniards" (p. 114).

Jusepe de Ribera, Pietà, 1637, National Museum of San Martino, Naples
Source: Wikimedia Commons

Juan de Jáuregui

Diálogo entre la naturaleza y las dos artes, pintura y escultura, de cuya preminencia se disputa y juzga 
[Dialogue between nature and the two arts, Painting and Sculpture, on the dispute and judgment of their primacy] (1618)

Here are some passages from the introductory note of Calvo Serraller (p. 147): "One of the most fruitful and suggestive topoi of modern art literature is undoubtedly the essential unity between poetry and painting... Over time, and particularly during the baroque, this structural legitimacy acquired a peculiar tone, that will create... the virtuosity of poets filling their verses of plastic metaphors or of painters looking for fantastic inventions, which, ultimately, are nothing but poetic inventions (...). With Juan de Jáuregui we are facing the perfect example of this happy combination: a poet and painter at a time, whose skill and brightness in both aroused the praise of his contemporaries to the point of perpetuating his memory as an embodiment of this paradigm" (p. 147).

Not much is left, however, of Jáuregui as a painter (1583-1641). The paintings are outnumbered by his poetic compositions in the field of plastic arts, among which, in the opinion of the editor of this anthology, stands out in particular this Diálogo entre la naturaleza y las dos artes, pintura y escultura, de cuya preminencia se disputa y juzga, which is reproduced in its entirety. Calvo Serraller states that it is possible that Jáuregui, in excellent personal relations with Pacheco, has debated and discussed the issue of the comparison between the arts with the Andalusian artist, who - four years later (in 1622) - published the pamphlet A los profesores of art de la pintura (To the professors of the art of painting) (see below) on which he extensively dwelled on the same topic.

Jusepe de Ribera, The club-foot, 1642, Louvre Museum, Paris
Source: Wikimedia Commons

Anonimo

Memorial de los pintores de la corte a Felipe III sobre la creación de una Academia o escuela de dibujo 
[Memorial of the court painters of Philip III on the creation of an academy or school of drawing] (1619)

With the Memorial de los pintores de la corte a Felipe III sobre la creación de una Academia o escuela de dibujo, presumably dated 1619, Calvo Serraller tackles one of the most underrated themes of Spanish art theory in 1600, namely the creation of an Academy of drawing. The seminal volume of Nikolaus Pevsner on Academies of Art: Past And Present - writes the editor - although impeccably outlining the development of the phenomenon, from the Renaissance origins to the progressive passage under the control of the state apparatus, did not cite the example of the birth of the Academy of Saint Luke in Madrid, so that for a long time it was even doubted that the Academy ever existed. There are at least four archival documents that encourage to believe it was the case: a contract in 1606 in which several Spanish painters rented some dependencies of a convent as local Academy; this memorial (led back to 1619 from internal evidence); a brochure signed by Juan de Butrón (dated 1626), which begins with the header "Academy of Painters" (see below) and the direct testimony of Vicente Carducho in his Diálogos de la pintura (Dialogues on painting). In particular, the memorial was published for the first time by Gregorio Cruzada Villaamil in an article entitled Conatos de formar una academia o escuela de dibujo en Madrid en el siglo XVII (Attempts to form a drawing academy or school in Madrid in the seventeenth century). The article was published in 1866 in the journal El Arte en España (Art in Spain). Of the four above mentioned documents "only the memorial published by Cruzada transcended the mere chronicle and presents us a complete view of the project" (p. 160). It was "an authentic informal draft of the Statute, with corrections and handwritten notes in the margin, which reinforced its draft character" (p. 159).

The memorial has been mentioned only a few times, and published even less frequently. When it was done, it was interpreted as an impromptu attempt, detached from the rest of the Spanish art scene. Calvo Serraller, to the contrary, placed it (along with the other documents relating to the Academy) in the framework of an authentic and structured movement with social claims, aiming at the institutionalization of art practice developed in Spain in the first three decades of the 1600s and essentially based on three pillars: the establishment of an academy, the legal disputes about taxes to be paid by painters and the extension of theoretical treatises on painting.

As mentioned, the memorial is anonymous. The fact remains - continues the curator of the anthology - that there is a strong suspicion that it was materially extend by Vicente Carducho or someone in his circle. Carducho – it should not be forgotten - was the Florentine Vincenzo Carducci, and had full knowledge of the Italian experiences on these issues, and especially on the Florentine Academy of Design; it was no coincidence that the proposed structure in the memorial followed that the Academy of Design in Florence; many fragments of this memorial are literally identical to those within the Diálogos (Dialogues) and finally the name of Vicente Carducho appears among those painters stipulating the lease of the premises of the future Academy of Painters in 1606.

Francisco de Zurbarán, Still Life with Lemons, Oranges, and a Rose,
1633, Norton Simon Museum, Los Angeles
Source: Wikimedia Commons

Francisco Pacheco

A los profesores del arte de la pintura 
[To the professors of the Art of Painting] (1622)

The name of Francisco Pacheco is inextricably linked to his Arte de la Pintura (The Art of Painting), which was published in Seville in 1649, but actually drafted in the first third of the century. Much less well known is this booklet entitled A los profesores del arte de la pintura, also printed in Seville, but in 1622. The publication definitely had its own reasons, tied to a specific reason (an argument over some payments between a sculptor and some painters), but - says Calvo Serraler - "the interesting thing about this publication... in fact exceeded the anecdotal circumstances that led to its extension, since it eventually became one of the most lucid, complete and timely writings among those that were published on the subject of the comparison of arts in the seventeenth-century in Spain" (p. 182). The curator was well aware that the problem of the comparison between the arts did not have, in those years, a purely academic value, but specifically concerned "the doctrinal formulation of the specific identity of the arts in the modern era" (ibid).

We already mentioned that Pacheco’s displayed several similarities with the poem in verse of Juan de Jáuregui (see above). Given the friendship that bound the two, it is highly likely that it was the result of a mutual comparison developed over time.

Juan de Butrón

Discursos apologéticos en que se defiende la ingenuidad del arte de la pintura 
[Apologetic speeches in defence of the ingenuity of the art of painting] (1626)

The full title, printed in Madrid in 1626, is Discursos apologéticos en que se defiende la ingenuidad del arte de la pintura. Que es liberal y noble de todos derechos (Apologetic speeches in defence of the ingenuity of the art of painting, which is liberal and noble in its own right). Calvo Serraller displayed it in couple with the Epístola dirigida al Rey suplicando protección para la Academia de los pintores (Epistle to the King with a plea for protection of the Academy of painters), a so far unpublished document tracked at the Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid, Mr R-Varios, 160-14. This did not happen by chance. On a margin note to the epistle, Butron wrote verbatim: "In the year 1626 I let print fifteen speeches in defence of the art of painting, which are those that, with this memorial, the Academy presented to His Majesty" (p. 196). As we have already seen talking of the anonymous Memorial de los pintores de la corte a Felipe III sobre la creación de una Academia o escuela de dibujo, the epistle was written on behalf of the Academy of Painters, and has therefore, in itself, a high documentary value.

Just like it was the case with Gaspar Gutiérrez de los Ríos, this is a writing of legal nature. Butrón was "professor of both rights and lawyer" and aimed to support the liberal nature of the art of painting. Of course, the legal nature of the propositions makes the text a bit rigid, but the Discursos apologéticos do not only include such theses. In particular, Calvo Serraller noted that Butron, in his fourteenth discourse, addressed a decisive theme as that of the goal of painting. He refuted the old claims of Seneca that the fine arts constituted incitement to lust, and rather advocated "with the utmost force the ethical value of painting according to the purest tradition of the Counterreformation. This tradition certainly implied the imposition of a strict control concerning the orthodoxy and the decency of the images, but nevertheless justified the value and significance of painting. And let us not forget what this will mean in the Baroque era: the example value of the works influenced by their effectiveness, the persuasiveness as a key to interpret the work of art" (pp. 197-198).

End of Part One
Go to Part Two