to solve a problem of composition, or in the happy flow of genial improvisation.  Michelangelo was wont to maintain that all the arts are included in the art of design.  Sculpture, painting, architecture, he said, are but subordinate branches of draughtsmanship.  And he went so far as to assert that the mechanical arts, with engineering and fortification, nay, even the minor arts of decoration and costume, owe their existence to design.  The more we reflect upon this apparent paradox, the more shall we feel it to be true.  At any rate, there are no products of human thought and feeling capable of being expressed by form which do not find their common denominator in a linear drawing.  The simplicity of a sketch, the comparative rapidity with which it is produced, the concentration of meaning demanded by its rigid economy of means, render it more symbolical, more like the hieroglyph of its maker’s mind, than any finished work can be.  We may discover a greater mass of interesting objects in a painted picture or a carved statue; but we shall never find exactly the same thing, never the involuntary revelation of the artist’s soul, the irrefutable witness to his mental and moral qualities, to the mysteries of his genius and to its limitations.

If this be true of all artists, it is in a peculiar sense true of Michelangelo.  Great as he was as sculptor, painter, architect, he was only perfect and impeccable as draughtsman.  Inadequate realisation, unequal execution, fatigue, satiety, caprice of mood, may sometimes be detected in his frescoes and his statues; but in design we never find him faulty, hasty, less than absolute master over the selected realm of thought.  His most interesting and instructive work remains what he performed with pen and chalk in hand.  Deeply, therefore, must we regret the false modesty which made him destroy masses of his drawings, while we have reason to be thankful for those marvellous photographic processes which nowadays have placed the choicest of his masterpieces within the reach of every one.

The following passages from Vasari’s and Condivi’s Lives deserve attention by those who approach the study of Buonarroti’s drawings.  Vasari says:  “His powers of imagination were such, that he was frequently compelled to abandon his purpose, because he could not express by the hand those grand and sublime ideas which he had conceived in his mind; nay, he has spoiled and destroyed many works for this cause; and I know, too, that some short time before his death he burnt a large number of his designs, sketches, and cartoons, that none might see the labours he had endured, and the trials to which he had subjected his spirit, in his resolve not to fall short of perfection.  I have myself secured some drawings by his hand, which were found in Florence, and are now in my book of designs, and these, although they give evidence of his great genius, yet prove also that the hammer of Vulcan was necessary to bring Minerva from the head of Jupiter.