He wasn't lucky. A few recognized his genius and had the power to spread his fame through word (see Vasari) and deeds (see papal patronage). His universal fame came after that, not always so quickly (the first reception of his David was negative among crowds). It's the same process as now: excellence accorded by the few, later, maybe, by the many who mostly learned from or imitated the few. I don't know of a case (in Western art history) in which it was other way around. Maybe you do. wc
Then how came Michelangelo is so lucky? Boris Shoshensky
