from what is perform'd Naturally, Eafily, and without Restraint. I have perhaps one of the greatest Curiofities of This kind that can be feen, because I have both the Coppy, and the Original; both are of Great Mafters, the Coppier was moreover the Difciple of him he endeavour'd to Imitate, and had Accuftom'd himself to do fo, for I have feveral Inftances of it, which I am very certain of tho' I have not feen the Originals. Michelangelo made That I am now speaking of, and which I Joyfully purcha fed lately of one that had just brought it from Abroad; 'tis a Drawing with a Pen upon a large half sheet, and confifts of 3 Standing Figures: the Coppy is of Battista Franco, and which I have, had several years, and always judg'd it to be what I Now find

it

as

it is. 'Tis an amazing thing to fee how Exactly the Measures are fol low'd for it does not appear to have been done by any other help than the Correctness of the Eye, if it has been trac'd off, or meafur'd throughout 'tis ftrange that the Liberty fhould be preferv'd that is seen in it; Battifta has also been exact in following every ftroak, even what is purely Accidental, and without any meaning; fo that one would think he endeavour'd to make as just a Coppy as possible, both as to the Freedom, and Exactness. But Himself is seen throughout most apparently: as great a Mafter as he was he could no more Counterfeit the Vigorous, Blunt pen of Michelangelo, and that Terrible Fire that is always feen in Him than he could have manag'd the Club of Hercules.

I am well aware of the Objection that will be made to what I am faying founded upon the Inftances of Coppies that have deceiv'd very Good Painters who have judg'd them to be of the Hands they were only Counterfeits of, and even when Thefe Hands have been their Own; To which I an

fwer,

1. A Man may be a very good Painter, and not a good Connoiffeur in This particular. To know, and distinguish Hands, and to be able to make a good Picture are very different Qualifications, and require a very different Turn of Thought, and both a particular Application.

2. Tis probable those that have been Thus miftaken have been too precipitate in giving their Judgments; and not having any Doubt upen the Matter have pronounced

Z

nounced without much Exami

nation.

Laftly, Admitting it to be true that there have been Inftances, of Coppies of This kind not possible to be detected by the Ableft Connoiffeurs, (which however I do not believe) yet This must needs happen fovery Rarely that the General Rule will however fubfift.

III. The next Question to be fpoken to is, Whether a Work feen to be of fuch a Master is Originally of Him, or a Coppy after fome Other

And here the firft Enquiry will be Whether as we fee the Hand of fuch Mafter in the Picture, or Drawing before us His Idea is alfo in it: And if it be judg'd the Thought is Not Originally of : Him we must further Enquire Whether he who did the Work under confideration endeavour'd

to

to follow that Other Mafter as well as he could, fo as to make what he did properly a Coppy; Or took fuch a Liberty as that his Work thereby becomes an Original.

This mixture, the Hand of One, and the Idea of Another is very frequently feen in the Works of Some of the greatest Masters. Raffaele has much of the Antique in his, not only Imitations, but Coppies. Parmeggiano, and Battista Franco drew after Raffaele, and Michelangelo; and the Latter made abundance of Drawings from the Antique having had an Intention to Etch a Book of that kind. Rubens drew very much from Other Mafters, efpecially from Raffaele; almoft all that Biaggio Bolognefe did was Borrowed from Raffaele, or Parmeggiano, or Imitations of their way of Z 2 Think