8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. X / by G.F. Hill

1/7

NOTES ON ITALIAN MEDALS-X'BY G. F. HILLI-SOME MEDALS BY BENVENUTOCELLINI

HE large medal which isillustrated on PLATE I, A,was recently acquired by Mr.Rosenheim, who recognizedits importance, on accountnot so much of any beautyit may possess as of the placewhich it takes in the workof a well-known craftsman. The remarkswhichfollow, both on the medal itself and on theattribution of other medals to the same artist,are essentially due to Mr. Rosenheim, at whosewish I lay them before the readers of this maga-zine.The medal is of lead, without reverse. It re-presentsthe bust, turned to the right, of Ercole IId'Este, fourth Duke of Ferrara, Modena andReggio. He wears a cuirass, on the breast ofwhich is a grotesque mask, somewhat resemblinga panther's. The piece measures 137 mm. indiameter. The inscription is HER%II" DVX"FER -IIII*MVT*ET'REG, but the stops,instead of being mere points, are of the triskelesshape; and at the beginning of the inscription isan ornament which appears to be a pine cone, orsomething of the kind.This medal has alreadybeen known for sometime in an incomplete form. Armanddescribed,2as the work of an anonymous artist a specimenin his own collection, measuringonly 133mm., towhich an alien reversehad been added. A speci-men of this hybrid was recently acquired by Mr.Rosenheim. The inscription on the obverse isblundered, IIII being converted into I M. Thisis a mere mistake,and not to be regardedas anabbreviation of ' Imolae.' The reverse,with twomounted knights tilting at each other before acastle, seems to be a pure invention, and is noteven medallic in style; it may possibly have beensuggested by an ivory-carving.Much more important than this hybrid is theadmirable one-sided specimen without inscriptionin the Goethe Museum at Weimar. Armanddescribes it as a fine proof, on which the legendhas disappeared, probably as the result of thechasing to which the piece has been subjected.So far as I know, the piece was first identified inprint as the work of Cellini by Dr. Carl Ruland.s

A fine reproduction was subsequently publishedby Dr. Buchenau,'who pointed out that Armandwas wrong in supposing that the inscription hadbeen chased away. It had never been present.Concentric circles to guide the artist in placinghis inscription had been incised on the model, andthese are to be faintly seen on the proof. Dr. vonFabriczy5gives a reduced illustrationof the piece,remarking that the inscription was meant to beengravedon the proof, the concentric lines beingintended to guide the engraver. Doubtless theywould serve that purpose, but their primaryobjectwas to guide the artist in building up the letteringon the model itself.6The diameter of the Weimar proof is 140mm.7Mr. Rosenheim's lead measures 137mm., a verysmall decreasefrom the diameterof the trialproof,considering the great size of the piece. Mr.Rosenheim, who has himself just examined theoriginal at Weimar, considers that the loss indiametermay be due not to shrinkage, but to atrimming of the edge of the stone on which themodel was worked,which reduced the diameterby about 2 mm. In any case the lead is a goodand early cast, possibly made by the artisthimself.The Weimar medal, as we have seen, has beenrecognized as the work of Benvenuto Cellini, and,indeed, as the obverse of the piece which he tellsus he made in 1540, when he was at Ferrara,onhis way to France. Here is the relevant portionof the passage in his autobiographys:-'The duke sent for me, and bade me take hisportrait; this I did upon a circular piece of blackstone about the size of a little trencher. . . Ittook me eight days to complete his likeness; thenhe ordered me to design the reverse. On it Imodelled Peace, giving her the form of a womanwith a torch in her hand, setting fire to a trophyof arms; I portrayed her in an attitude of glad-ness, with very thin drapery,and below her feetlay Fury in despair,downcast and sad,and loadedwith chains. . . . The duke . . . gave me inscrip-tions for both sides of the medal. That on thereverse ran as follows: Pretiosa in conspectuDomini; it meant that his peace with the Popehad been dearly bought.' Cellini adds that hetook the medal, completed, to the duke before hewent away.Various views have been expressed about this

1Forthe previousarticlessee BURLINGTONMAGAZINE,Vol.ix,p. 408 (September,19o6); Vol. x, p. 384(March,1907); Vol.xii,p. 141 (December, i9o7); Vol. xiii, p. 274 (August, 1908);Vol. xiv, p. 21o (January, 19o9); Vol. xv, pp. 31, 94 (April andMay, 1909); Vol. xvi, p. 24 (October, i909); Vol. xvii, p, 143(June, g19o).211, 147, ; III, 218, a. In 1, 147, 2, he mentions the passagein Cellini's 'Life,' with which we shall deal presently, butremarksthat the medalthere describedis unknown.3 Das Goethe-Nationalmuseumzu Weimar,' Sonderabdruckaus d. Jahrb.d. Kon,Akad.zu Erfurt,N.F., XXIV(1898),p. i8.

For referenceto this, and to the articleby Dr. Buchenau,to bementionedimmediately,we are indebted to Herr Lockner,ofWiurzburg. Dr. Rulandagain called attention to the existenceof the piece in the ' Frankfurter Zeitung' for November 3, 1900(citedby Dr. Buchenau). He notedthat the mask on the breastof the cuirasswas notquitefinishedin the proof.4'Blditter fiir Miinzfreunde,' 1900oo,p. 156, and Pl. 14o, No. 5,5'Italian Medals,'p. i45, P1.XXX, 4,6See BURLINGTONMAGAZINE,April, 1909, p. 31.7Confirmedby Dr. von Oettingen. 'Thickness' in theEnglish translationof Fabriczyis an obviousslip for'diameter.'8P, 255 in Bacci's edition; I quote from Symonds's transla.tion, with a slightmodification, '3

8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. X / by G.F. Hill

2/7

Notes on Italian Medalsmedal by writers to whom its existence in anyform was yet unknown: they may be read inPlon's work on Cellini (p. 202). It is hardlynecessary to mention the theory that the piecewas not a medal in our sense of the word, but acarving in black stone. Such works do not as arule have reverses. The black stone about thesize of a little trencher was of course a disc ofslate, or something similar, such as we know wasused by wax modellers for a modelling board.?The ' little trencher' (taglierettoda tavola) aptlydescribes the size of the piece which has comedown to us.But what else is there to connect it with Cellini?The mere fact that it is one side of a medal ofErcole II, corresponding more or less in sizewith one which Cellini says he made, is hardlyenough. There is, however, something more; ifwe compare the treatmentof the relief in the headof the Duke, and the head in Cellini's medal ofClement VII [PLATE II, A], the similarityof hand-ling is at once apparent. Most noticeable is therather harsh way in which the relief fails to bemodulated into the background; the perpendicu-lar edge of the relief is especially perceptible inthe noses of both heads. The comparativecoarse-ness of rendering in the lead medal is no morethan might be expected in a piece of this size byan artist accustomed to work on a smaller scale.In the Weimar specimen much of this coarsenesshas been removed by chasing.The description of the missing reverserepeatsclosely the account given by Cellini 0oof the reverseof the medalalreadymentioned,which he made forPope Clement VII in I534. There too he repre-sented Peace as 'a slender woman, dressed in verythin drapery,gathered at the waist, with a littletorch in her hand, setting fire to a heap of armsbound together like a trophy. In the backgroundI had shown part of a temple, where was Discordchained with a load of fetters. Round about itran a legend with these words: Clauduntur belliportae.' This is a common medal; the specimenillustratedin PLATE II, A, is in the British Museum."The resemblancebetween this figure of Peace,as shown on the medal of Clement, and thefigure of Prudence on a medal of Jean de Lorraine,Cardinal of Sant' Onofrio, has suggested1 thatthis latter medal is also fromCellini'shand [PLATE

I, B]. The specimen illustrated,from Mr. Rosen-heim's collection, is certainly altogether charac-teristic of Cellini'swork. The figureof Prudence,holding a mirror in her left hand, a pair ofcompasses in her right, with a dragon at her feet,is a skilful and charming design, with just thattouch of prettiness that has made Cellini take aplace in popular estimation far above his merit asa creative artist. The craftsmanshipdisplayed inthe modelling and chasing of both portrait andreverse design is brilliant. The doubts whichhave been expressedby critics such as Plon aboutthe attribution of this work to Cellini seem un-necessary, so far as they are inspired by anysupposed inferiorityof the piece to his accreditedwork. It may be noted that the specimen illus-tratedby Plon is very poor, which may accountfor the unfavourableopinion which he expresses.Jean de Lorraine,born in 1498, becamea Cardinalin i518. Cellini may well have known him inRome; but the medal shows him at a matureage,so that it may have been made in France in1537 or between 1540 and 1545-One thing, however, is clear, apart from theattribution to Cellini ; and that is that, whoevermade this medal of the Cardinal,made also twoother medals, neither of which, I believe, hashitherto been associated with it. The figure ofPrudence on the reverse of the medal of Scara-muccia Trivulzio (here illustrated, by Mr. Whit-combe Greene's permission, from his specimen),[PLATEI, c],' is line for line the same as on themedal of the Cardinal de Lorraine. And it wasevidently designed to accompany the obverse,notmerely attachedto it by a subsequenthand. It willbe noticed thatthe stops on this reverseare of thesame shape as on the medal of Ercole d'Este.Fabriczyattributedthismedal,aswell asanother,'apparentlya reduction from the first, if not by thesame hand, to Caradosso. Dr. Bode's hesitationin acceptingthe attribution1"seemswholly justified.,The 'modelling and extraordinarilyfine chasing,which Fabriczyregardsas favouringhis attribution'indicate Cellini just as much as Caradosso. Theresemblance to Caradosso lies chiefly on thesurface, especially in the flat modelling of theportrait-bust. The date of the medal-between1517 and 1522-iS, it must be admitted, early forCellini. But we know from his autobiographythat he was experimenting in work of this kind inhis early days at Rome, when he was about twenty-three years old; he made,'6 for instance, a large

See BURLINGTONMAGAZINE,ann. cit., p, 32.10oBook I, Chapter LXX, in Symonds's translation.11Armand I, 148, 2. These medals, it should be remembered,are struck from dies, not cast like the medal of Ercole d'Este.12To J. Friedlinder, ' Munzen u. Med. des B. Cellini,' Berlin,1855, p. 7. Dr. Buchenau notes, as a point of connexionbetween this medal and the well-known medal of Bembo, thaton both the word ' Cardinalis' is abbreviated as 'Car.,' not*Card.' The point would be of more value if the medal ofBembo were quite certainly by Cellini, and if the same abbre-viation were not used by many other artists. See, for instance,Armand II, io9, 2 (Candida's medal of Giuliano della Rovere) ;I16, 45 (medal of Francesco Alidosi); 150, 15 (Jacopo Sadoleto) ;152, 8 (Antonio Pucci). In fact, it seems to be the commonerform of abbreviation.

13The specimen illustrated by Fabriczy (PI. XXXIV, 4) iscurious. On the obverse the inscription (which, by the way,also has the abbreviation CAR.) reads wrongly COMIH forCOMEN. The reverse, on the other hand, is evidently froman unfinished model, since, like the Weimar Ercole d'Este, ithas concentric lines, but no inscription.14A specimen is illustrated in the Simon Catalogue, No. 2o6.1 ' Zeitschr. fiir bild. Kunst,' XV, p. 42.16p. 49 in Bacci's edition; Bk. I, Chap, XXV, in Symonds'stranslation,'4

8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. X / by G.F. Hill

3/7

iBA

- -- "p~giL~IF

6F~I I I I s~i~i"BI?Z

NOTES ON ITALIAN MEDALS.-X, PLATE I

8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. X / by G.F. Hill

4/7

A

B h?B

C C

lie

f E

D

NOTES ON ITALIAN MEDALS.-X. PLATE 11

8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. X / by G.F. Hill

5/7

Noteson Italian Medalsgolden medal for Gabbriello Ceserino to wear inhis hat, with a design of Leda and the Swan.(English readersmust not be misled,by Symonds'scareless use of the word 'engraved,' to supposethat this medal was a flat engraved badge;the Italian word is 'isculpito.') Soon after men-tioning this badge, Cellini speaks of the medallicwork7of Caradosso and other artists,saying thathe proceeded to perfect himself in this art. Theway in which he mentions Caradossoindicatesanartisticdebt to the Milanesemedallist,which is, aswe have seen, evident to a certain extent in theportraitof ScaramucciaTiivulzio.The medals of the Cardinalde Lorraineand ofScaramucciaTrivulzio carrywith themyet another,representing Pietro Piantanida [PLATE II,. B].18The figure of Faith on this piece, holding achalice and pointing upwards,is, it will surely beadmitted,own sister to the figuresof Prudenceonthe medals of the Cardinal and Trivulzio. Thatbeing so, it is hardly necessaryto drawattentiontothe triskelesstops in the legend DVM SPIRITVSHOS REGET ARTVS, or to the little leaf-likeflourish in the exergue,which is found also at theend of the legend on the medal of the Cardinal.It would be interesting to know whether theother reverse"9which occurs in association withthe portraitof Piantanida is also by thesame hand.But no specimen is known to me, and Armand'sstatement thatone is in the Vienna Hofmuseumseems to be incorrect."Nothing appears to be known of Piantanida,but it is presumedthathe belonged to the Milanesefamily of that name.Thus we have a group of medals, representingthree persons,all indissolublyconnected with eachother by thegeneral style of their reverses, as wellas by the forms of their stops and ornaments.One of these hasalreadybeen attributedto Cellini.two of them have the same stops as are found onThe large portraitof Ercole II, also independentlyattributedto Cellini, and corresponding, so far aswe can judge, with the medal of which he himselfgives us the description. In this deceitful world,no attribution is certain, even when a work issigned; but the case for the attribution to Celliniof all this group of medals seems to be veryrespectable.Some stresshas been laid on the three-legged ortriskeles stop which is found on no less than threeof these pieces. It is an unusual form, very rarein the fifteenth century, not common in thesixteenth until after the middle of the century,when it is used, for instance, by GianfederigoBonzagna and Giannantonio Rossi. In fact, theonly other examples before 1550 which I can

quote are the medals by the 'Medallist of theCaptive Love' of JacopaCorregiaand MaddalenaRossi and Spinelli's medal of Andrea Gritti withthe church of San Francesco della Vigna, dated1534. Doubtless a few other instances would berevealedby search.This peculiarstop and a leaf-like ornamentnotunlike that which we have noticed on the medalsof the Cardinal de Lorraine and of Piantanidaoccur,curiouslyenough, in conjunctionon the finemedal of the otherwiseunknownVenetian,AntonioBossi.12 The British Museum specimen is illus-trated on PLATE II, C, not in order to supportan unwarrantableattributionto Cellini, but ratherto show how a strongerhand treatssubjects akinto his. The noble figureof Fame on the reverseof this medal is more largely conceived, morefinely composed and modelled, than anythingfrom Cellini's hand; its forms generally are castin the mould of greatsculpture. The handlingofthe draperyon the medals of the Cardinalde Lor-raine, Trivulzio and Piantanida is seen to beniggling and petty when compared with this.We shall not be far wrong, I think, in seeing inthis piece theinfluenceof the greatFlorentinewhoworked at Venice, and whose works have some-times been claimed for Cellini-I mean JacopoSansovino.

II-ANTONELLO DELLA MONETADocuments published by Count Nicol6 Papa-dopoli22 have thrown a certainamount of light onthe obscure history of the Venetian mint in thefifteenth century. In these, among other refer-ences of interest, are to be found records of theactivity of a certain Antonello, engraver to themint, which I enumerate in a footnote." Fromthese documents it appears that Antonello diPietro, variously described as ' orefice' or, from

'9

a'7 Medaglie cesellate fatte di piastra' and 'medaglie in-tagliatein acciaio.'is From the BritishMuseumspecimen."iArmand III, 223, E.S0CommunicationfromRitterA von, Loehr.

2'Armand II, 225, 6; Fabriczy, P1, XVII, 4. The medalbelongstothethirdquarterof thesixteenthcentury.2 ' Alcunenotiziesugli intagliatoridellaZeccadi Venezia' in' Riv. ital.di numism.,'I (1888),pp. 351-358. Cp.his ' Monetedi Venezia,'in which information,analysedin the next note, isgiven: I, pp. 277, 282 ; II, pp. 5, 44, 45."31454,26thJuly. LucaSestoandAntonellodella Monetaarementioned as in receipt of a salary as engravers of dies.(Probablythe second-namedartisthad come into officeon thedeath of GerolamoSesto in 1447; butthis is mere conjecture.)1461, 13th March. The engraver Antonelloreceives anorder for dies.1462, I4th May. The Signoria approves the die for thegrosso, fato permande MaistroAxtonelloa.1472, 24th July. Antonello di Pietro, called also Antonellodella Moneta,and his two sons arein the employ of the mint,thesalaryof the two sons being deductedfromthatofLucaSesto, who is no longercapableof work.1483, i6th October. Luca Sesto,being old and unable tocome to his work,asksfor his son Bernardoto be mademasterof the dies. This is granted.1484,24thFebruary[givenas 1483,27thFebruary,in ' Riv.ital.,' I, p. 353; the difference in the years is presumablydueto the calendar]. Alexander de Leopardis, goldsmith, isadmittedas thirdmaster,withoutsalary, with Luca Sesto andAntonelloorefice. Silvestroand Pasquale sons of Antonelloastampis,complain that they have served long in the hope ofsucceedingtheirfather,and offer to submitproofsof theirskill.

8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. X / by G.F. Hill

6/7

Noteson Italian Medalshis post, as 'della Moneta,' was active at theVenetian Mint from 1454 (perhaps from 1447) to1484. From the last entry it appears that hisfamily name was Grifo (or, as it is written in thenote of Silvestro's death in 1503, Griffo).Now there are two interesting medals repre-senting doges who were ruling during this period,one signed AN, the other ANT. The initials AN,writes Fabriczy,"2'are insufficient to dispel theobscurityof' the originof the former;and 'whetherthe medal of the Doge Cristoforo Moro, signedANT, belongs to the same artist is doubtful onaccount of the differencein style.' However, letus describethem :

(I) Francesco Foscari, Doge 1423-1457.Obv. FRANCISCVS FOSCARI DVX. Bustto right in ducal robe and cap. Rev. VENETIAMAGNA,and in exergue AN. Venetia, wearingcuirass over tunic, seated to front on a throneformed by two lions; she holds in her right asword erect, and in her left a kite-shaped shieldcharged with a lion rampant; at her feet are twohalf-figures.Bibliothtque Nationale. Bronze, 46 mm. P1. II, D. Cp.Armand I, p. 25. Heiss, 'Venise,' P1. I, Nos. i (48 mm.)and 2 (41Imm.). The second medal is describedby Heiss asconsisting only of a reverse,which is found attached to theportraitof CristoforoMorobythe artist'Ant.' He and Armandbothagree in supposingthat this combinationis a hybrid.We may note that the type is adapted from, orgoes back to a common original with, an inte-resting relief on the fagade of the Palazzo Ducaletowards the Piazzetta25representing'Venecia' withthe same attributes,with the sea flowing beneathher feet,and the proudlegend on a scroll: FORTISIVSTA TRONO FVRIAS MARE SVB PEDEPONO. The two half-figuresthen,on the medalsas on the relief, representthe 'furies' of discordand sedition, not, as they have hitherto beendescribed,captives.(2) Cristoforo Moro, Doge 1462-1471.Obv. CRISTOFORVS ?MAVRO *DVX" (leafon stalk). Bust to left, in ducal robe and cap; onthe truncation,n ANT *Rev. Within an oak wreath,' RELIGIONIS"ET' IVSTICIAE . CVLTOR in four lines, andtwo leaves on a stalk.Borderof dots on both sides. Stops: invertedtriangles.British Museum. Bronze, 42 mm. P1. II, F., Keary,'Guide.' No. 74. Cp. Armand I, 46, I. Heiss, Venise, PI. I,No.6, p. 105.

Aglance at the twomedals,as illustratedinPLATEII, D and F, will show the great difference instyle between them, which seems amply to justifythe refusalof Armandand Heiss to admitthattheycan be from the same hand." It is, however,extremely natural to suppose that medals of thedoges should, in some cases at least, be made byengravers at the Venetian mint at this period asthey were later, for instance, by Camelio. Andwhen we have an engraverAntonello employed atthe mint precisely at the period at which thesemedals signed AN and ANT were produced, thesupposition in questionbecomes morenaturalthanever, even although it be recognized that namesbeginning in Ant. . . are very common. We arehowever not much advancedso long as we do notknow which of the two medals to attributeto ourengraver. The laterpiece,on the whole, seems onstylistic grounds to have much the stronger claim.It lacks the largeness of style, the boldness ofmodelling, which characterizethe medal of Fos-cari; the minutedecorationof the capand robe andthe flat and uninspiredreversesuggest that it maywell have been the work of a man accustomed touse the graver. The medal of Foscari,on the otherhand, has considerable sculptural quality. It isworth notice-though I do not advance it as areason for attribution-that Vettor Gambello,whowas appointedengraver in 1484,was the son of oneAntonio, marmorariuscognomentodeSan Zacharia,at that time no longerliving. The artistwho madethe Foscari medal, adapting for his reverse typethe design of a piece of sculptureon the fagadeofthe ducal palace, may well have been this sculptor.III-THE MONUMENT OF GIAN GIACOMOTRIVULZIO

The little medal illustratedin PLATEII, E, is, Ibelieve, extremelyrare.Obve. IO ? IA 'TRI MAR' VIGLE' MARE-SCAL FRAN ? Equestrianstatue of Gian Gia-como Trivulzio to right, holding battonin right;in the exergue, device of a cross in flaming circle(the ruota del Sole) between the letters S V.Rev. .- INGENIVM : SVPERAT : VIRESand in exergue S V. Female figure seated toright on a stool, nude to waist, holding in right awand behind her head, in left a cord which isattached to a lion standing on a garlanded basis.Borderof dots on bothsides.RosenheimCollection. Bronze,31.5mm. P1.II, E.This is clearly Milanese work of the early partof the sixteenth century. It reminds us in somedegree of a small group of medals of Ludovico ilMoro, which have been attributed to Caradosso,27

1484,4thMarch. A trial is ordered.1484,3othMarch, The two sons of Antonelloare retainedto work with theirfather,one of them to succeed him on hisdeath.1484,28th September. Vettor di Antonio da San Zacharia(i.e , VettorGambelloor Camelio)is made master of the dies.1484,29th September. The work on the dies of the ducatdivided betweenLucaSesto (uno de i pidiantiqui maistride lestampede la zecha nostra)and Alessandrodei Leopardifor theobverse, and Pasquale and Silvestro di Antonello for the reverse.1490, 9th December. Silvestro Grifo, master of the dies,inventsa new alloy.21' Italian Medals,' p. 73.a2Venturi,'Storiadell' Arteital.,'VI, pp. 27, 28.

" Ofcourse,the fact thata copy of thereverseof the Foscarimedal is found attachedto the Moro portraitdoes not proveany original connexionbetween them.7 Friedlnder,' Ital. Schaumiinzen,'p. 188.20

8/7/2019 Notes on Italian medals. X / by G.F. Hill

7/7

Notes on Italian Medalswithout very great probability.8 They celebratethe defeats of the French and their expulsionfrom Italy.The medal has not found its way into Armand'scollection, although it had alreadybeen illustrated(by a very indifferent engraving, it is true) inRosmini'sLife of the Marshal." Rosminidescribesthe medal accurately except that he takes thewoman for a man. He makes the interestingsuggestion that the reverse may refer to the routof the Venetians by the French (with whomTrivulzio was present) at Agnadello on I4thMay, 1509, the lion representing Venice. So, wemay note, the horse represents Naples on one ofthe medals of Ludovico il Moro mentionedabove.Rosmini says the piece reminds him in style andcolour of metal of another, which he describesand illustrates. This medal also has escapedArmand'snet. I have been unable to meet witha specimen, but describe it after Rosmini.Obv. 10 IATRI MARVIGIE LE MAFRANTIE (trefoil) and, in exergue, MCCCCCVIII.The marshal on a prancing horse to right; hewears a cuirass, and holds baton erect in hisright; behind him, a young man on horsebackriding on his left.No reverse, Bronze. Diameter, 44 mm. (to judge fromillustration). Rosmini,II, Pl. III, 43.The date 15o8 on this medalconfirmsRosmini's

conjectural date for the one before us. Theyoung man is, perhaps, the marshal'sson, GianNicol6.Rosmini is unable to explain the letters S V;his suggestion that they are the signature of anartist is not likely. It is tempting to see in themsome allusion to Vigevano, but what the S maymean I do not know. The place can hardly haveboasted a 'Senate.' Although there was never amint at Vigevano, there prevailed,as earlyas 1596,a traditionthat the marshal had coins (nummi)ofbronze and silver struck there.s0 Possibly thesemedals are the nummi in question.The most interesting point about the medal,however, is none of these; but the fact that wehave on it an equestrianportraitof Trivulzio. Inspite of its small scale, the figureis clearlyseen tobe a portrait. The general composition is doubt-less more or less conventional, but it is impossibleto ignore it in connexion with the designs whichLeonardo da Vinci made for the equestrianmonument of the marshal. It may be left tostudents of Leonardo to say whether it isactually inspiredby Leonardo'sdesigns-in whichcase it might help us to sort out the drawings forthe Trivulzio monument from the others whichresemble them-or, as I am inclined to thinkmoreprobable, is merely the medallist's notion, sug-gested by his knowledge that the monument hadbeen designed." H. de la Tour,'Rev. Num.,' 1896,pp.92ff.%C. de Rosmini, 'Dell' Istoria... di Gian-JacopoTrivulzio'(Milan,1815), II, P1.III, No. 44 andp. 378. S"Rosmini, II, p. 346.

THE WEAKNESS AND STRENGTH OF TURNERBY A. GLUTTON BROCKNGLISH painting has alwaysbeen enfeebled by a desire torepresentwhat is not. Its evilgenius is that Satan, the god ofunreality,whomBlakeaddressedand defined in a wonderfulverse--

Though thou art worshipped by the names divineOf Jesusand Jehovah, thou art stillThe Son of Morn in weary night's decline,The lost traveller'sdream under the hill.English painters are always painting 'the losttraveller'sdream under the hill,' a dreamof some'shady city of palm trees,'or of some past age ofthe world in which they would ratherlive than in

their own; and in trying to see that dream theyget a distaste for the visible world about them.Painting is not the art of imitating reality, butrather the art of expressing a passion for reality,and without this passion no man can be a greatpainter. Correggio and Titian had it no less thanRembrandt. They painted what their eyes had

dwelt upon from childhood and what was endearedto them by a thousand associations. Englishpainters,when they try to be Italian or French, donot paint what their eyes have dwelt upon fromchildhood, and in their pictures there is none ofthat richness and intensity that only come fromassociation. They have made a false distinctionbetween idealismandrealism,fromnot understand-ing that the distinction exists only for the critic,not for the artist. The artist must be both realistand idealist, always painting an idea that he getsfrom reality and its emotional associations, andnot from the picturesof other artists. In fact, hisraw material must be life, not art. From art hecan only learn method, and it is often dangerousfor him to learn method that is associatedwitha raw materialdifferentfrom his own.The besetting weaknesses of English art areillustratedmore signally, perhaps,in the careerofTurner than of any other English painter, justbecause he was the greatest of our paintersand atlast overcamethem. And it is well to draw atten-tion to these weaknesses because we cannot

21