Page:Vasari - Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, volume 1.djvu/324

310 selves were finely proportioned, magnificently arranged, and richly adorned, as may be seen in that astonishing erection, the cupola of Santa Maria del Fiore, in Florence, and in the beauty and grace of its lantern; in the graceful, rich, and variously ornamented church of Santo Spirito; and in the no less beautiful edifice of San Lorenzo; or again, in the fanciful invention of the octangular church of the Angioli; in the light and graceful church and convent belonging to the abbey of Florence; and in the magnificent and lordly commencement of the Pitti Palace, to say nothing of the vast and commodious edifice constructed by Francesco di Giorgio, in the church and palace of the Duomo, at Urbino; of the strong and rich castle of Naples; or of the impregnable fortress of Milan, and many other remarkable erections of that time. And if, in certain portions of the works executed during that period,—in the cornices, for example, in the light carving of foliage, and delicate finish of other ornaments,— we fail to perceive the exquisite refinement and grace exhibited in later times, as will be seen in the Third Part of my book, we are yet bound to admit that they are, to a certain extent, good and beautiful, although we may not accord to them the praise due to those who afterwards displayed a perfection of lightness, richness, grace, and refinement, equalled only by the best architects of antiquity. We do not, then, consider the second period perfect; for we have seen later times produce works superior, and may therefore reasonably affirm that something was still wanting. Certain individual works then executed are indeed so admirable, that nothing better has been accomplished, even to our own times, nor perhaps will be in times to come—as, for example, the lantern of the cupola of Santa Maria del Fiore; or, for grandeur, we may instance the noble cupola itself, wherein Filippo had not only the courage to imitate the ancients as to the vastness of the erection, but even surpassed them in the height of the walls. But we are here speaking in general terms of a period, and are not permitted to infer the excellence of the whole from the undisputed goodness, or even perfection, of a part.

What is here said of architecture, may, with equal propriety be affirmed of painting and sculpture, in both of which are still to be seen many extraordinary works executed by the masters of the second period, as that of Masaccio in the