DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.62783#0083
VITRUVIUS AND GUEVARA.
15
should be covered with linen soaked in very pure water ;a for this
linen cloth, besides preserving the moisture of the plastering, will
moreover prevent the air from drying it; and as to the parts on
which the artist is painting, he should proceed as follows. Clean
sponges should be steeped in very pure water, and partially squeezed,
and then applied to the parts of the plastering most necessary to be
kept moist, and this process being repeated frequently and with pro-
per care, the wall may be kept moist a sufficient time, and thus we
shall attain the end desired; namely, to have old walls painted with
great firmness and in the most perfect manner.
It remains to be noticed, that Vitruvius has not informed us with
what the colours employed on such walls were tempered. The
moderns have remedied this by using lime-water; and as this has
been found successful in painting, we believe that the ancients used
the same, and if they did not, that this is sufficient, even if the an-
cients did not use it. However, I must remark, that the modems
Thermae, and at the sepulchres of the ancient Romans, must also be considered
as painted in secco; so that the theory of the chemist, (which may be seen in
the ‘ Effemeridi Letterarie di Roma,") a theory consisting in applying
phlogiston, and by that means restoring to their former splendour the
colouring of the ancient pictures, is liable to some exceptions. This theory
supposes, firstly, that the pictures on intonaco, found in the excavations at
Rome, were painted in true fresco; secondly, that the colors were all mineral
colours. I consider, that according to the authority of Vitruvius, both these
propositions are equally false. I grant that the colours on the ancient intonachi
may be revived by phlogiston; but I deny the truth of the arguments which
induced them to try this.
“ The reason, however, why the ancients did not paint in fresco, when they
well knew that the plaster of the intonaco seized the colours, and that the
colours so applied, resisted the inclemency of the weather, is a very different
question from the first. Whether the ancient Romans did or did not employ
our method of fresco painting, is a question of fact; and from facts we know that
the ancient Romans did not paint in true fresco. The above mentioned question
is a speculation.
“ Pictures in true fresco require lime, instead of white lead, to mix with the
colours; and colours mixed with lime produce a very different effect when dry,
to what they do while wet. Painting in true fresco requires such quickness and
readiness in the application of the colours, that at present, there are but very few
painters in Italy, who both sketch and finish their figures in true fresco.”—Ed.
a The artists of Munich have a contrivance for arresting the drying of the
work, which is somewhat similar to that described by Guevara. See I. Rep.
page 18.”—Ed.
15
should be covered with linen soaked in very pure water ;a for this
linen cloth, besides preserving the moisture of the plastering, will
moreover prevent the air from drying it; and as to the parts on
which the artist is painting, he should proceed as follows. Clean
sponges should be steeped in very pure water, and partially squeezed,
and then applied to the parts of the plastering most necessary to be
kept moist, and this process being repeated frequently and with pro-
per care, the wall may be kept moist a sufficient time, and thus we
shall attain the end desired; namely, to have old walls painted with
great firmness and in the most perfect manner.
It remains to be noticed, that Vitruvius has not informed us with
what the colours employed on such walls were tempered. The
moderns have remedied this by using lime-water; and as this has
been found successful in painting, we believe that the ancients used
the same, and if they did not, that this is sufficient, even if the an-
cients did not use it. However, I must remark, that the modems
Thermae, and at the sepulchres of the ancient Romans, must also be considered
as painted in secco; so that the theory of the chemist, (which may be seen in
the ‘ Effemeridi Letterarie di Roma,") a theory consisting in applying
phlogiston, and by that means restoring to their former splendour the
colouring of the ancient pictures, is liable to some exceptions. This theory
supposes, firstly, that the pictures on intonaco, found in the excavations at
Rome, were painted in true fresco; secondly, that the colors were all mineral
colours. I consider, that according to the authority of Vitruvius, both these
propositions are equally false. I grant that the colours on the ancient intonachi
may be revived by phlogiston; but I deny the truth of the arguments which
induced them to try this.
“ The reason, however, why the ancients did not paint in fresco, when they
well knew that the plaster of the intonaco seized the colours, and that the
colours so applied, resisted the inclemency of the weather, is a very different
question from the first. Whether the ancient Romans did or did not employ
our method of fresco painting, is a question of fact; and from facts we know that
the ancient Romans did not paint in true fresco. The above mentioned question
is a speculation.
“ Pictures in true fresco require lime, instead of white lead, to mix with the
colours; and colours mixed with lime produce a very different effect when dry,
to what they do while wet. Painting in true fresco requires such quickness and
readiness in the application of the colours, that at present, there are but very few
painters in Italy, who both sketch and finish their figures in true fresco.”—Ed.
a The artists of Munich have a contrivance for arresting the drying of the
work, which is somewhat similar to that described by Guevara. See I. Rep.
page 18.”—Ed.