m ex oculis quaerimus invidi."

This edition of Tambroni is not from an original MS. or printed copy,
but from a transcript about a century old, discovered by Angelo Mai
among the Ottobonican manuscripts. Two other copies of Cennino Cennini
are known to exist; we are curious for their examination, the present
rescript _may_ in some respects be deficient. As Cennino Cennini
completed his work 1437, and the discovery of Van Eyck is said to have
been 1410, it might have been expected that we should find some notice
of Van Eyck's vehicle. We rather lament than are surprised that we find
none. Those were the days for secrecies. Cennino himself speaks of many
of his recipes as great secrets; and we are told that Van Eyck only in
his old age taught his secret to Antonello--and the whole story goes to
show the profound secrecy with which this vehicle was retained; nor is
there any reason to doubt that it occasioned the murder of Domenico,
said to have been perpetrated in 1470, thirty-three years after the
writing of Cennino Cennini. Vasari says positively, that "John Van Eyck
would not let any one see him work, nor would he teach the secret to any
one--but being old," &c. This is certainly an argument against those who
would affirm, if Van Eyck had discovered a vehicle, it would have been
universally known. Such secrets are slow in progress, independent of the
caution to keep them so. Artists did not formerly spring up self-taught;
they were bound to masters, and learned their art from the beginning,
and slowly, and learned not many of their secrets till after years of
servitude, for such we must call it. They had then to make as well as to
grind their own colours, to make their own brushes, tablets, and cloths.

Mrs Merrifield and Tambroni certainly do not agree in their opinions
respecting this discovery of a vehicle by Van Eyck. The Italian is
rather foolishly sensitive for the honour of his country, and his
sensitiveness seems to bias his judgment. He would not that a foreigner
should have the merit. Tambroni believes, and probably truly, that
Vasari never thoroughly read Cennino; but he bears testimony to the
_noble_-mindedness of Vasari--"Whence," says he, "we are constrained to
believe that he merely glanced lightly over the titles to the chapters
of part of the manuscript; and that, thinking it useless, he did not
care to examine and investigate the whole work. For this reason it
cannot be supposed that this noble-minde