The Atlantic Monthly, Volume 01, No. 04, February, 1858

Vasari and Condivi are the great providers of facts in relation to Michel Angelo, and they have left little to be desired in this respect. The garrulous fondness of Vasari leads him into delightful Boswellian details, and gives us more than a mere outline narrative. Mr. Harford has transferred much of Vasari's writing to his own pages, but has succeeded in translating or mistranslating all vitality out of it.

Mr. Harford has attempted, by giving sketches of the chief characters of Florence and of Rome during Michel Angelo's life, to show some of the personal influences which most affected him. But his bricks all lie separate; they are not built up with mortar that holds them together. A superficial account of the Platonic Academy is inserted to show the effect of the fashionable philosophy of Florence upon the youthful artist; but it is so done that we learn little more from it than that the Academy existed, that Michel Angelo was a member of it, and that he wrote some poems in which some Platonic ideas are expressed. There is no philosophic analysis of the individual Platonism which is apparent, not only in his poems, but in some of his paintings,—no exhibition of its connection with the other portions of his intellectual development. Michel Angelo's ideas of beauty, of the relation of the arts, of the connection between Art and Religion, deserve fuller investigation than they have yet received. His tremendous power has exerted such a control over sensitive, imaginative, and weak minds, that even his errors have been accepted as models, and his false ideas as principles of authority. Mr. Harford's book will do little to assist in the formation of a true judgment upon these and similar points.

But we will not confine our notice to assertions; we will exhibit at least some of the minor faults upon which our assertions are based,—for it would demand larger space than we could give to enter upon the illustration of the principal faults of the book. First, then, for inaccuracies of statement,—which are the less to be excused, as Mr. Harford had ample opportunity for correctness. For instance, in the description of the tombs of the Medici, Mr. Harford writes of the famous figures of Aurora and Twilight, Day and Night: "The four figures that adorn the tombs are allegorical; and they are specially worthy of notice, because they first set the example of connecting ornamental appendages of this description with funereal monuments. Introduced by so great an authority, this example was quickly followed throughout the whole of Europe." The carelessness of this assertion is curious. The custom of connecting allegorical figures with funereal monuments had prevailed in Italy for a long time before Michel Angelo. Perhaps the most striking and familiar instance, and one with which Mr. Harford must have been acquainted, is that afforded by the tombs of the Scaligeri at Verona, where, on the monument to Can Signorio, of the latter part of the fourteenth century, appear Faith, Hope, Charity, Prudence, and other allegorical figures.

Again, in speaking of the old basilica of St. Peter's, he speaks of the unusual Orientalism of this the principal church of Western Europe, whose entrance is towards the east and the altar to the west. Now this Orientalism is by no means unusual in the churches at Rome. Indeed, it seems to have been the rule of building for the early churches,—and Santa Maria Maggiore, San Giovanni Laterano, San Sebastiano, San Clemente, and innumerable others, exhibit it in their construction. The priest, officiating at the altar, which stood advanced into the church, looked toward the east.

Again, Mr. Harford says, "The pencil of Giotto was employed by Benedict XII. in the year 1340"; but he does not tell us how the pencil answered the purpose for which it was employed in a hand other than its master's. Giotto died in 1336.

Such are specimens of errors of statement. We can give but a very few examples of the numerous mistranslations we have marked,—mistranslations of such a nature as to throw a doubt over the statements in every portion of the book. In a letter to Luca Martini, thanking him for a copy of Varchi's commentary on one of his own sonnets, Michel Angelo says: "Since I perceive by his words and praises that I am esteemed by the author to be that which I am not, I pray you to offer such words to him from me as befit such love, affection, and courtesy." This Mr. Harford translates as follows: "And since I am almost persuaded by the praises and commendations of its author to imagine myself to be that which I am not, I must entreat you to convey to him some expressions from me appropriate to such love, affection, and courtesy."—Again, writing to Benvenuto Cellini, to express his pleasure in a portrait bust of his execution, which he had just seen, he says: "Bindo Altoviti took me to see it—I had great pleasure in it, but it vexed me much that it was put in a bad light." Mr. Harford renders: "Bindo Altoviti recently showed me his own portrait, which delighted me, but he little understood me, for he had placed it in a very bad light."¹²—Again, in another letter, Michel Angelo says: "Teaching him that which I know that his father wished he should learn," which Mr. Harford transforms into, "I will teach him all that I know, and all that his father wished him to learn." Rather a considerable promise!—In another letter, Mr. Harford makes Michel Angelo say, "I thank you for everything you say on the subject, as far as I can foresee the future." Michel Angelo did say: "For which news I thank you heartily," or, to translate literally and to show the origin of Mr. Harford's error, "I thank you as much as I know how I can,"—quanto so e posso.

One would have supposed that a consciousness of an imperfect acquaintance with the Italian language might at least have deterred Mr. Harford from attempting poetical translations from it. But he has notwithstanding rendered many of Michel Angelo's poems into English verse. Of these poems Wordsworth said, "So much meaning has been put by Michel Angelo into so little room, and that meaning sometimes so excellent in itself, that I found the difficulty of translating him insurmountable. I attempted at least fifteen of the sonnets, but could not anywhere succeed." How Mr. Harford has succeeded where Wordsworth failed, we will leave our readers to infer.

We wish that dissatisfaction with Mr. Harford's volumes might lead some better qualified person to attempt the biography of Michael Angelo.

* * * * *

*** The continuation of the story, "Akin by Marriage," is unavoidably deferred, owing to the severe illness of the author. It will be resumed as soon as his health shall permit.