DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.61022#0154
ROMAN ART
pierced irregularly by a large window which was not in the
centre. A precisely similar wall in the next room was used
for a single composition, but in this case he did not attempt
to compose one large scene which would occupy the whole
wall. Nor did he, as would an artist of the age immediately
preceding, satisfy himself by cutting up the space into three
contiguous fields and filling each of them by a separate picture.
Instead of this he carried still further the elaborate architectural
scheme, which he had already used to frame the frescoes on
the other three walls, and made it the basis of the decoration
of the fourth. He divided the wall above the window trans-
versely by means of a heavy painted cornice and set two painted
niches, one on each side of the windows, using each in such
a way that it might seem a portion of the architecture, and
that it and the figures, for which it served as a background,
might appear in perspective and so mask the diversity in the
size of the walls on which they were painted. Above, in the
lunette between the cornice and the painted arch of the ceiling,
he placed a single row of life-sized figures which he painted
as though they stood solid against a background of real sky.
In this decorative scheme, Raphael was acting on precisely
the same principles as was Michelangelo in the adjacent Sistine
Chapel. Michelangelo had to convert an unimposing roof of
a chapel into a vast vault; Raphael an irregular and meanly
proportioned chamber into a worthy meeting-place for the Papal
Court. Both succeeded by the use of imaginary architectural
ornament and structure, and by decoration with semi-statuesque
forms and inset pictures. The conception of a large and dignified
space which underlies both decorations is identical, and, making
due allowance for the purpose of the rooms and the position
of the decoration to the spectator, both aim at producing much
the same effect by the character of their figures. If the current
stories as to the secrecy with which Michelangelo worked in
the chapel have any truth, Raphael can have owed nothing
132
pierced irregularly by a large window which was not in the
centre. A precisely similar wall in the next room was used
for a single composition, but in this case he did not attempt
to compose one large scene which would occupy the whole
wall. Nor did he, as would an artist of the age immediately
preceding, satisfy himself by cutting up the space into three
contiguous fields and filling each of them by a separate picture.
Instead of this he carried still further the elaborate architectural
scheme, which he had already used to frame the frescoes on
the other three walls, and made it the basis of the decoration
of the fourth. He divided the wall above the window trans-
versely by means of a heavy painted cornice and set two painted
niches, one on each side of the windows, using each in such
a way that it might seem a portion of the architecture, and
that it and the figures, for which it served as a background,
might appear in perspective and so mask the diversity in the
size of the walls on which they were painted. Above, in the
lunette between the cornice and the painted arch of the ceiling,
he placed a single row of life-sized figures which he painted
as though they stood solid against a background of real sky.
In this decorative scheme, Raphael was acting on precisely
the same principles as was Michelangelo in the adjacent Sistine
Chapel. Michelangelo had to convert an unimposing roof of
a chapel into a vast vault; Raphael an irregular and meanly
proportioned chamber into a worthy meeting-place for the Papal
Court. Both succeeded by the use of imaginary architectural
ornament and structure, and by decoration with semi-statuesque
forms and inset pictures. The conception of a large and dignified
space which underlies both decorations is identical, and, making
due allowance for the purpose of the rooms and the position
of the decoration to the spectator, both aim at producing much
the same effect by the character of their figures. If the current
stories as to the secrecy with which Michelangelo worked in
the chapel have any truth, Raphael can have owed nothing
132