The Discourse on Perspective in Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo’s Trattato dell’Arte della Pittura

The paper presents the complex discourse on perspective which the Milanese painter Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo writes in book V of his Trattato dell’Arte della Pittura (1584), explaining why the theoretical and practical discourse on the subject can be interpreted as the result of the artist’s erudition, personal connections and direct artistic experience.


Introduction
The artist and writer on Art Giovanni Lomazzo , in book V on perspective, implements opinions of ancient authors with those of modern "scholars of perspective", to present a discourse on the subject that embeds practical suggestions for painters on "how to make the right perspective" into an exhaustive theoretical discussion based on contemporary and previous optical theories. Lomazzo presents notions that are most likely taken from the writings of people with whom he was familiar with. In this paper, I broaden my research on the subject (Tramelli, 2016) and attempt to make sense of Lomazzo's discourse on perspective analyzing the links he makes between perspective, the power of vision and the role of the eye, hinting at the examples of viste prospettiche he inserts in the book which are useful to understand his theoretical discourse on the subject.

The Research
Giovanni Lomazzo, author of the Trattato dell'Arte della Pittura (1584), was active as a painter from around 1550 until early 1570. Later, when he started to collect and organise the material that he published in his treatise, perspective was widely discussed among artists and architects of Milan, as attested by certain print evidence. Kemp noted that few books were published solely on perspective in Italy until the mid-sixteenth century (Kemp, 1994: 92-98 ' Pittori, Scultori, et Architetti in 1569. Therefore, it is safe to assume that there was a lively discussion among scholars of perspective (or perspettivi, as Lomazzo calls them) on different ways of constructing space, which resulted in publications at a later stage. An environment favourable to this discussion could have been the Italian accademie, which constituted hybrid spaces of interaction and discussion between people of different backgrounds (artists, men of letters, mathematicians, etc.). Based on these (relatively free) discussions, there is a need to codify the existing methods of creating the illusion of space, a practical topic which artists of the period still found the need to discuss. Lomazzo's fifth book, dedicated to perspective, testifies to this need to collect and share knowledge on the subject: he presents (in a confused manner, as was his style) complex optical problems integrated into the theoretical discussion of how we can define prospettiva, how it should be divided into subcategories, and how an artist can learn it and apply it in their pictorial work. Prospettiva is subdivided into three types: optica, sciografica, and specularia. The first deals with the beams of light and is again divided into two subtypes: physiological and grammatical; the second concerns the study of shadows; and the third concerns the use of mirrors to create the illusion of space. Lomazzo describes prospettiva throughout with the interesting adjective acutissima (most insightful), a key term for understanding how the artist perceives this subject. Perspective needs to be learned and appropriated not only theoretically, but from the eminently practical viewpoint of its use as a viable tool for the artist to understand and use in his pictorial work. It is not a subject which can stand alone but is inherently linked to the discourse on light in other parts of his writing. Before Book V, Lomazzo makes references to perspective in other chapters, such as the book on proportion, Ch. XXIII, when discussing the proportions adopted for architectural buildings. Although quoted by different authors in art historical scholarship (Ciardi, 1973;Bora, 1980;Kemp, 1990Kemp, , 1994Frangenberg, 1991), Lomazzo's discourse on perspective has never truly been contextualised, mainly because of the difficulty in giving order to the subject, which is mentioned in many parts of his writings. I have already attempted to make sense of his discourse in my book (Tramelli, 2016), and this article expands on my research on Lomazzo's treatment of perspective to shed more light on the link between the theoretical discourse and the practical notions that he conveys in the book, devoting particular attention to the actual works of art which the author mentions as examples of good prospettiva.

The Definition of Perspective
Lomazzo gives a definition of prospettiva in the third chapter of the fifth book ('Della diffinizione della prospettiva') that we can infer is geometrical. Painters defined it as a 'scienza delle line visibili', which 'descends from geometry and its object of study is the line, of which it seeks the causes, the principles, the universal and immediate elements per se (Lomazzo, 1584in Ciardi, 1973. We see how the author takes a proactive approach to the subject: perspective seeks the principles and elements of the line, indissolubly linking prospettiva from the very beginning to beams of light and vision (the linee visuali). He will mention again these 'visible lines' in the book on light when defining lume (Book IV, Ch. III). According to the author, these lines, together with the coloured body and the power of the eye (la potenza dell'occhio), are essential elements making vision possible. As I stated in my book, the optical discourse seems central to Lomazzo's theoretical treatment of perspective, and it was later developed in Chapters IV to X, where he discusses general and particular manners of seeing, beams of light, the eye, the object, and distances (Tramelli, 2016, pp. 130-132). The central role of vision and optics is quite remarkable, and the question arises: where did Lomazzo's interest in optics come from? What are his sources and his direct (or indirect) influences? In addition to his scattered knowledge of Aristotle, most likely mediated by Italian translators and commentators, Lomazzo was likely to have discussed the subject directly with his fellow academicians and colleagues. As is known, he was a leader and member of the peculiar Accademia de la Val di Blenio, whose members included artists and mathematicians. Another important acquaintance could have been a mathematician active in the Court of Turin, Giovanni Battista Benedetti, whose book Diversarum Speculationum Mathematicarum et Physicarum Liber was published in 1585.
After this definition, Lomazzo creates a complex division of the subject which he struggles to follow throughout the book, which is not surprising, as the Treatise had a complex compilation and publishing history (Ackerman, 1964) and we find different subjects discussed throughout the book without much order. As Panofsky (1940) noted, Lomazzo's division of perspective into three ways of sight can be found in the contemporary Codex Huygens, attributed to Carlo Urbino. Urbino divides vedute into: the normal view, the worm's view, and the bird's view (Fig. 1). The fifth book of the Codex, written around 1570, concerns prospettiva. For reasons of brevity, we do not discuss the links and similarities between Urbino's and Lomazzo's discourses, which have already been mentioned by Kemp (1994: 87-88). It is worth noting that both writings, though different in nature (one is a published treatise, the other an incomplete manuscript) are similar in intent: the authors both wish to provide their readers with practical notions and rules to 'make the right perspective', and they both take up notions derived from Leonardo with different degrees of mediation. Notably, many of the ideas presented in Lomazzo's writings derive from Leonardo's lost pages concerning the methods of foreshortening, eventually suggesting the use of a distanza that is 'proportionate and comfortable to the eye'.
We should consider that Lomazzo, like Leonardo, is not a trained scholar but a painter; therefore, he states his opinion and knowledge on the subject after discussing the theories of vision with contemporary men of letters, trying (at least on paper) to apply them to the realm of painterly practice, simultaneously building his own theory of perspective for the Treatise, which will earn him the reputation of a learned artist.
The discourse on the viste mentite and its link to the pictorial works of Lomazzo's time.
Lomazzo's discussion of the viste mentite appears quite unexpectedly in the book on perspective when he begins one section by creating a new categorisation that he had not mentioned in the introduction. Thus, viste mentite can be subdivided as follows: prima suprema perpendicolare. seconda obliqua. terza superiore. quarta mezzana. quinta inferiore. sesta intrante.
As other scholars have noted, it is somewhat unclear what the artist means by viste mentite, or 'fictitious views', because the illustrations which he probably intended to add are missing. One aid comes from the examples of works of art he adduces which were known to him by direct experience (one indication of this statement is that he takes regional examples from Milan and northern Italy). One example is worth mentioning: for the first vista mentita suprema perpendicolare, Lomazzo includes paintings that are on a flat surface but viewed from below, 'in such a way that this figure seems larger than higher, but the foreshortening make us see it such as it would be in reality', usually utilised in the depiction of saints in the corners. To exemplify this vista, he mentions the fresco portraying the Holy Father from the tiburio of Santa Maria di Campagna in Piacenza by Pordenone (Fig. 2). Lomazzo certainly knew this fresco personally, since he worked in the city around 1567 creating a fresco for the Monastery of Sant'Agostino, the mentioned Cena Quadragesimale. We have an interesting preparatory drawing for this at the Royal Collection in Windsor Castle (Fig. 3), in which we can see the complex perspectival construction of a castle's architecture in the background intertwined with the foreshortened perspective of the banquet in the background. This drawing testifies to Lomazzo's application of his theoretical notions in his pictorial work.

Conclusion
Lomazzo's prospettiva is derived from a combination of theoretical and practical notions which he wants to convey in his treatise. From more traditional (probably mediated) perspettivi, such as Vignola, Danti, and Serlio, he adds contemporary optical theories advanced by authors such as Barbaro, Benedetti and Leonardo, which were most probably discussed in the intellectual environment of which he was a part. Interest in such topics is supported by other sources, including Urbino's Codex Huygens. From this combination, the author's theoretical discourse on perspective incorporates various interesting notions on optics, and to the book on perspective Lomazzo adds his experience as a painter, embedding practical suggestions for artists and mixing theory and practice. Moreover, he dabbles with architectural issues, presenting different practical examples and methods of foreshortening for artists to use. Although this book was often criticised as not being consistent in all its parts, it is ultimately the result of artists' knowledge, connections, and practical experience. Panofsky, Erwin. 1940 Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.