Volltext Seite (XML)
Chap. VII PIETRO PERUGINO. 171 This master was of no great talent, says Vasari, yet he had a feeling for his art, and a great veneration for those who distinguished themselves in it, and he always assured his pupil “that of all places in which perfect painting might be attained, none was more advantageous than Florence, where men were taught by competition to use their wits and work with industry, in order that they might rise above an intolerable mediocrity, and ascend to fame and honours”. 1 In these words the Aretine biographer pro bably sketches the character of Bonfigli, whom elsewhere he has described as the favorite of the Perugians before Vannucci became known; we may doubt whether he meant Fiorenzo, a man of fair repute, who took good lessons from his cotemporaries, and was the companion rather than the teacher of Pietro. We should be content, in this uncertainty, to reflect that Perugino received a most fortunate education, which was not to be had except in a good school; we may assume that he learnt most of the secrets of his profession at Perugia, and that then ho fancied there was yet room for greater acquirements. It would not be far wrong, indeed, to suppose that he took to wandering as a journeyman, and that he thus became the associate of Piero della Francesca; for Vasari mentions at least two frescos at Arezzo; and suggests that they were produced by Perugino when he was Piero’s assistant. 2 From thence he bent his steps to Florence, eager to see the masterpieces of that capital, or to become acquainted with the persons of artists whose names had already been heard in the workshops of the provinces. Bontigli, and Piero della Francesca, would both have impressed his mind with the grandeur of Flo- Commune) states that it was done in 1472. This date (or rather the illegible trace of it) is followed on the wall by the words: “Fu’fatto questo lavorio al tempo olio era priore Andrea di Giovanni della Compagnia della fraternita di ,S. Maria. Franciscos de Castro Plc- bis pinxit”. The painting is injur-j ed, and blackened, and hardly visible, so that the worth of Fran cesco is not to be judged. But the fact remains that Citth della Pieve had also a painter of its own. 1 Vas. VI. 30. 32. 2 Vas. IV.23. The frescos (which were in S. Agostino and S. Cata rina) are gone,