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 Two

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 Two

Diego Velázquez, Portrait of Pope Innocenzo X, 1650, Rome, Galleria Doria-Pamphili
Source: Wikimedia Commons

Go Back to Part One

Francisco Cornejo e altri

Copia de los pareceres y censuras… sobre el abuso de las figuras, y pinturas lascivas y des honestas
[Copy of the opinions and condemnations ... about the abuse of the figures, and lascivious and honest paintings] (1632)

The full title of this 27-page booklet published in Madrid in 1632 is Copia de los pareceres y censuras de los reverendísimos padres maestros y señores catedráticos de las insignes universidades de Salamanca, y de Alcalá, y de otras personas doctas, sobre el abuso de las figuras, y pinturas lascivas y des honestas, que se muestra, que es pecado mortal pintarlas, esculpirlas y tenerlas patentes donde sean vistas. The English translation is “Copy of the opinions and the condemnations drafted by the reverend father teachers and gentlemen professors from distinguished universities of Salamanca and Alcala, and by other learned people, concerning the abuse of the figures, and lascivious and honest paintings, showing that it is a mortal sin to paint, sculpt and keep them where they can be seen by everybody”. Calvo Serraller edited it from the first edition.

The editor of this anthology reminds us that the short writing did not remain completely unknown, since it was mentioned both by Carducho in his treatise of 1633 (see below) and by Giovan Domenico Ottonelli and Pietro da Cortona in their Trattato della pittura e scultura, uso e abuso loro (Treatise on painting and sculpture, and on their use and abuse) (pp. 34-35), printed in Florence in 1652. Since then, however, it seemingly fell into oblivion.

The "Copia de los pareceres... has a certain value as a symptom of the moral climate of the Spanish Baroque culture, in which the hegemony of the Counterreformation was total. On the other hand, it is also interesting as a collation and a revival of moralistic clichés about art in the style of those of Cardinal Paleotti; in short, as an instrument of control and censorship of the images" (p. 238).

Vicente Carducho

Diálogos de la pintura 
[Dialogues on Painting] (1633)

Vicente Carducho, Self-portrait, about 1633-1638, Glasgow, Pollok House
Source: Wikimedia Commons

The Diálogos de la pintura. Su defensa, origen, esencia, definición, modos y diferencias (Dialogues on Painting. Its defence, origin, essence, definition, modes and differences) were published by Vicente Carducho in 1633. A second edition (from which are drawn the passages presented in this anthology), was printed in 1865, and edited by G. Cruzada Villaamil; finally a third one, and first critical edition, was curated by Francisco Calvo Serraller and released in 1979. There is no doubt that the work of Carducho – as Serraller writes – belonged to the category of great Spanish treaties of 1600; yet it was probably the one that suffered most due to the unjustified criticism of art historians of the late nineteenth and first half of the twentieth century. And here we are returning to the main purpose of this anthology, namely to demonstrate that there was no Golden Age of Spanish painting from which the contemporary treaties were totally divorced, but that the latter, far from failing to grasp the most significant aspects of that painting, were indeed their faithful literary-theoretical reflection. In the case of Carducho, then, there is no doubt that one should discount a couple of (silly) prejudices against him: the first, and most parochial one, was linked to the Italian origins of Carducho (Vicente Carducho was actually Vincenzo Carducci; while he was born in Florence in 1576, he had already moved to Spain in 1585 and remained there until the death in 1638); the second one is related to the alleged (and definitely overrated) rivalry between Carducho and Velázquez. The latter, much younger (he was born in 1599), would have deprived the former of important royal commissions in the latter stage of his artistic career.

Calvo Serraller recalls how important it is to express an opinion on Carducho as theorist, trying to forget all these clichés. First of all, the eight Diálogos de la pintura were "the ripened fruit of a lifelong engagement aiming at a cultural and critical enhancement of the exercise of painting" (p. 262); clear signs hereof were "his enthusiastic participation in the creation of an Academy of Painting; his friendly relations with an important circle of intellectuals, among whom we should mention Lope de Vega, José de Valdivielso, Pérez de Montalbán, Jáuregui, etc.; his deep knowledge of the great collections of paintings that used to be at the court in his days, and, above all, his vast and selected library, arguably one of the best of those we know of the artists of that century" (p. 262). The Diálogos, however, offered a broad and complete testimony of the theoretical debate of the time, often anticipating issues that would be discussed in Italy only from the 40s onwards (see page 264 footnote 20); and they did so with an eminently pedagogical character which is undoubtedly a peculiar aspect, compared to the contemporary Italian treatises.

The Dialogues, as we said, are eight, but may be conventionally divided into three sections: "a first part summing up, defining and assigning value to everything one must know about the painting; a second part, setting out the general ideological definitions as a framework for a detailed review of the major controversies of the time (part that we must consider as the central one, in literary and value terms, because it exposes the "good painting method"); and finally a third section, which offers a number of testimonies over the historical events of painting at the Spanish Court" (p. 264).

Lope de Vega (and others)
Memorial informatorio por los pintores en el pleito… sobre la exempción del arte de la pintura
[Information statement by the painters who are in a lawsuit ... on the exemption of the art of painting] (1629)

The Memorial was published in Madrid in 1629 with the full title of Memorial informatorio por los pintores en el pleito que tratan con el señor de su Magestad, en el Real Consejo de Hazienda, sobre la exempción del arte de la pintura. The English translation is: “Information statement by the painters who are in a lawsuit and deal with the lord representative of His Majesty in the Supreme Court on the exemption of the art of painting”. Once again it is, therefore, a writing which, drawn for pure legal purposes (the motivation was the claim of some royal officials not to recognize tax exemptions to the painters), ended up dwelling on theoretical reflections on the practice of painting itself and its full membership in the list of liberal arts. The Memorial of 1629, which collects various and authoritative testimonies of Spanish scholar circles of the era, in order to defend the reasons of the artists, saw the personal involvement among the parties of Vicente Carducho himself, who did not fail to add it (keeping the text practically unchanged) as an appendix to his Dialogues, also to celebrate his acquittal, which happened just in 1633, coinciding with the publication of his treatise. Among the different opinions presented in the Memorial, Calvo Serraller offers those of three people particularly close to Carducho, like Félix Lope de Vega Carpio, José de Valdivielso and Juan de Jáuregui.

Francisco Pacheco

Arte de la Pintura 
[Art of Painting] (1649)

Diego Velázquez, Portrait of Francisco Pacheco, 1622, Madrid, Prado Museum

The treatise was published posthumously in 1649. In 1990, a critical edition, edited by Bonaventure Bassegoda y Hugas, was released. Please refer to the review of the third edition (2009), published in this blog.


Claudio Antonio de Cabrera (Diego de Saavedra Fajardo
Juicio de artes y ciencias
[Judgement on arts and sciences] (1655)

It is a short text published in Madrid in 1655, and signed by an unknown Don Claudio Antonio de Cabrera. The debate on the work has lately allowed to establish, with reasonable certainty, that the author was the writer Diego de Saavedra Fajardo and that the Juicio was nothing but "the first printed edition of the famous República literaria" (p. 449), published with this title in 1670.

Lázaro Diáz del Valle
Origen yllustración del nobilísimo y real arte de la pintura y dibuxo
[Origin and illustration of the noble and royal art of painting and drawing] (1673)

A critical edition was produced by David Garcia Lopez in 2008. I am referring to the respective review, published in this blog.

Jusepe Martínez
Discursos practicables del nobilísimo arte de la pintura
[Practicable discourses on the most noble art of painting] (1673)

Jusepe Martínez, Self-portrait with his father's portrait,  about 1630, Museum of Zaragoza
Source: Wikimedia Commons

Here there have been even two editions after Calvo Serraller’s anthology: the first was curated by Julián Gállego (Madrid, Akal Ediciones, 1988) and a second by María Elena Manrique Ara (Madrid, Ediciones Cátedra, 2006). Please refer to the review of the latter, published in this blog.

Anonymous

Memorial dado por los profesores de la pintura
[Statement given by the professors of painting]

The full title of this short paper is Memorial dado por los profesores de la pintura, suplicando sean admitidos a honores como otras artes liberales lo han sido enumerando para ello sus méritos y los testimonios recibidos desde los tiempos más remotos. The English translation is: Statement given by the professors of painting, pleading to be admitted to the honours of other liberal arts, and enumerating, to this end, their merits and the testimonies received from the remotest times.

We are once again confronted with a written document drafted on the occasion of one of the many causes related to privileges and tax exemptions claimed by artists. Although it has no date and place of publication, this short statement, preserved in the National Library in Madrid with signature V.E. 141-14, can very likely be identified (thanks to internal evidence) with a similar document quoted by Palomino in his Museo pictórico (see below), and printed in Zaragoza in 1677. This would make it very close to the scholar circles which Jusepe Martínez was acquainted with. He might have been the author, or at least the inspirer, of the writing.

Pedro Calderón de la Barca
Deposición… en favor de los profesores de la pintura
(Deposition ... in favour of the teachers of painting ) (1677)

The full title of the manuscript is Deposición de Don Pedro Calderón de la Barca en favor de los profesores de la pintura, en el pleito con el procurador general de esta Corte, sobre pretender éste se le hiciese repartimiento de soldados. The English translation is: “Deposition of Don Pedro Calderón de la Barca in favour of the teachers of painting in litigation with the Attorney General of this Court on pretending they should provide soldiers.”

Virtually forgotten - with certain exceptions - by modern critics, the manuscript was drafted in Madrid in 1677. Its importance is given especially by the reputation of its author. Once again, the motive of the statement by the great Spanish writer was linked to the numerous fiscal and tax disputes involving the Iberian painters in the course of the entire century. Calderon proved to have a good knowledge on the subject and quoted with sufficient precision Gaspar Gutiérrez de los Ríos, Juan de Butrón and other relevant writings of Vicente Carducho.

"The ideological analysis of Calderón’s text fails to provide - as expected – any innovation in terms of substance; it was a collection of topoi among those employed in traditional arguments in defence of the liberal character of the painting" (p. 538).

Diego Velázquez, Las meninas, 1656, Prado Museum
Source: Wikimedia Commons

Félix Lucio Espinosa y Malo

El Pincel 
[The brush] (1681)

The short pamphlet was printed by the scholar Felix Lucio Espinosa y Malo in Madrid in 1681, and then republished in 1722. Calvo Serraller transcribes it in its entirety from the first edition. It is not excluded that the publication of the booklet was due to the same legal dispute on which Pedro Calderón de la Barca had already taken a position in 1677.

"Written in a conceptual and pompous style, it displays a purely ideological interest: the only two mentions of modern artists consist of a few brief mentions to Michelangelo and Guido Reni. El Pincel was conceived as part of a clearly baroque spirit, as is demonstrated by its sensorial interpretation of art, its emphasis on the effectiveness and usefulness of art and the approach of overcoming naturalism"(pp . 549-550).

Bosser
Jurídica demonstració de la noblesa de la art y professors de la pintura
[Legal proof of the nobility of art and of painting professors)] 1688

"In seventeenth-century Spain, the painters aimed at institutionalizing the liberal nature and the nobility of their work not only through legal-tax court cases, but also with the creation of academies which, by themselves, were deemed to express a different type of teaching from the transmission of mere workshop secrets ... the writings that we are publishing below - the “Legal proof of the nobility of art and painting professors” and the “Statutory Privilege of the Real College of Painters of Barcelona” [note of the editor: both dated 1688] - are a leading example of the evolution which the traditional guilds of artists experienced. So... if the associational tradition of Barcelona painters dated back to the Middle Ages, there had been a progressive achievement in terms of awareness, leading to an attempt to radically transform the old institution of the gremio: since 1683, painters tried to give themselves a new legal regulation to obtain an independent status and, in 1687, they appointed a commission to speed up the transition in this direction... The second of the two writings [note of the editor: the Statutory Privilege...], for its part, has the great interest in showing us a model of constitution and operational mode of this College-Academia" (p. 571).

José García Hidalgo
Principios para estudiar el nobilísimo, y real arte de la pintura
(Principles to study the most noble and royal art of painting) (1693)

The full title is Principios para estudiar el nobilísimo, y real arte de la pintura, con todo y partes del cuerpo humano, siguiendo la mejor escuela y simetría, con demostraciones matemáticas que ajustan y enseñan la proporción y perfección del rostro y ciertos perfiles del hombre, mujer y niños. The English translation is: “Principles to study the most noble and royal art of painting, with all parts of the human body, following the best school and symmetry, with mathematical demonstrations that adjust and teach the proportion and perfection of the face and certain profiles of men, women and children.”

The Principios by José García Hidalgo (or more pompously José García Hidalgo Quintana Burvezo Álvarez y Montoya) were written in 1693. With a hint of irony, Calvo Serraller remembers that they were almost immediately counted among the worst quality writings produced at the time. Nevertheless, besides limited contributions to biographies of minor artists, the text was undoubtedly characterized by a rich set of illustrations. "The Principles contain about 135 engravings, which address issues such as proportions, physiognomy, perspective, anatomy, anamorphosis... In fact, the Principles are not a doctrinal treatise in the manner of Carducho or Pacheco, but rather an academic album for the drawing teaching" (p. 590).

The critical edition of the work was curated by Sergio G. Mateo and published by Editorial Tératos publishers (with the sponsorship of the University of Valladolid), in 2006

Antonio Palomino
Museo pictórico, y escala óptica
[Pictorial Museum and Optical Scale] (1715-1724)

Juan Baptista Simo, Portrait of Antonio Palomino, 1726
Source: http://www.artnet.com/artists/juan-baptista-simo/portrait-of-acisclo-antonio-palomino-de-castro-y-7bUEjbBKz8gTahB6PctQGA2 via Wikimedia Commons

Published between 1715 and 1724, the Museo pictórico, y escala óptica by Antonio Acisclo Palomino de Castro y de Velasco did not belong, in the strict sense, to the temporal boundaries considered in this anthology, but can nevertheless be considered as the final outcome of a century that saw Spanish painting touching its moments of greatest splendour. Calvo Serraller speaks of a kind of encyclopaedic testament that the painter drafted over thirty years.

The Museo pictórico, y escala óptica was published in three tomes, divided into two volumes. The first volume included only the first tome. Released in Madrid in 1715, it dealt with the Theory of Painting and was in turn divided into three books, titled El aficionado, El curioso ed El diligente (The amateur, the curious and the diligent). The second volume (which included two tomes) was printed nine years later, also in Madrid, in 1724. The second volume was dedicated to the practice of painting and was in turn divided into six books (numbered from IV onwards, and in continuity with what published in 1715). They are: El principiante: primer grado de los pintores, El copiante, El aprovechado, El inventor, El práctico and El perfecto. (The beginner: first degree of painters; the copyist; the hard-working; the inventor; the practitioner; and the perfect) The third volume, finally, was titled El Parnaso Español Pintoresco Laureado (The Spanish Parnassus laureate in painting) and presented the biographies of 226 Spanish and foreign artists (if operating in Spain). It is immediately obvious how vast Palomino’s effort was; rightly so, his work was considered a milestone in the history of painting in Spain. It is not surprising that the most exploited and appreciated part of the work was El Parnaso Español Pintoresco Laureado, i.e. the third volume, for which several comparisons were attempted with Vasari (even if more than 150 years separated them); an annotated edition of this third volume was released in 1986. Calvo Serraller, however, points out that a careful study of the ideological and documentary sources of Palomino is still missing; today we also lack a complete critical edition of the work. It is, in fact, the only major Spanish treatise on art still without a critical edition.

The passages proposed by Calvo Serraller are taken - and could not be otherwise, given the nature of this anthology – from the first and second parts of the Museum, and so are perfectly complementary to the above mentioned critical edition of the Parnassus. The result - according to the curator – is that the Museum “is characterized, in general, by an extraordinarily liberal, not to simply say eclectic spirit. Certainly (as the majority of the treatises written in the seventeenth century) it keeps a classicist doctrinal conception, although open to any kind of concession to the theatrical freedom of a baroque sensibility that has triumphed in full" (p. 621).