The History of Painting in Italy, Vol. 3 (of 6)
by Luigi Lanzi · English · Gutenberg #34645 · 620,228 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The History of Painting in Italy, Vol. 3 (of 6)
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The History of Painting in Italy, Vol. 3 (of 6)
Author: Luigi Lanzi
Translator: Thomas Roscoe
Release date: December 13, 2010 [eBook #34645]
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34645
Credits: Produced by Barbara Tozier, Carol Brown, Bill Tozier and
the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE HISTORY OF PAINTING IN ITALY, VOL. 3 (OF 6) ***
Produced by Barbara Tozier, Carol Brown, Bill Tozier and
the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net
THE
HISTORY OF PAINTING
IN
ITALY.
VOL. III.
THE
HISTORY OF PAINTING
IN
ITALY,
FROM THE PERIOD OF THE REVIVAL OF
THE FINE ARTS,
TO THE END OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY:
TRANSLATED
From the Original Italian
OF THE
ABATE LUIGI LANZI.
BY THOMAS ROSCOE.
_IN SIX VOLUMES._
VOL. III.
CONTAINING THE SCHOOL OF VENICE.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR
W. SIMPKIN AND R. MARSHALL,
STATIONERS'-HALL COURT, LUDGATE STREET.
1828.
J. M'Creery, Tooks Court,
Chancery-lane, London.
CONTENTS
OF
THE THIRD VOLUME.
HISTORY OF PAINTING IN UPPER ITALY.
BOOK THE FIRST.
VENETIAN SCHOOL.
Page
EPOCH I. _The old masters_ 1
EPOCH II. _Giorgione, Titian, Tintoretto, Jacopo da
Bassano, Paolo Veronese_ 91
EPOCH III. _Innovations of the mannerists of the seventeenth
century. Corruption of Venetian
painting_ 254
EPOCH IV. _Of exotic and new styles in Venice_ 347
HISTORY OF PAINTING
IN
UPPER ITALY.
BOOK I.
VENETIAN SCHOOL.
This School would have required no farther illustration from any other
pen, had Signor Antonio Zanetti, in his highly esteemed work upon
Venetian Painting, included a more ample consideration of the artists of
the state, instead of confining his attention wholly to those, whose
productions, ornamenting the churches and other public places, had all
been completed in the city of Venice alone. He has, nevertheless,
rendered distinguished service to any one ambitious of succeeding him,
and of extending the same subject beyond these narrower limits; since he
has observed the most lucid order in the arrangement of epochs, in the
description of styles, in estimating the merits of various painters, and
thus ascertaining the particular rank as well as the age belonging to
each. Those artists then, whom he has omitted to commemorate, may be
easily reduced under one or other of the divisions pointed out by him,
and the whole history enlarged upon the plan which he first laid down.
In cultivating an acquaintance with these additional names, the
memorials collected by Vasari; afterwards, on a more extensive scale, by
the Cavaliere Ridolfi, in his Lives of the Venetian Painters; and by
Boschini, in the _Miniere della Pittura_, in the _Carta del Navegar
Pittoresco_, and in other works: materials drawn from all parts of the
Venetian state--will be of signal advantage to us. No one, it is hoped,
will feel displeased at the introduction of the name of Vasari, against
whom the historians of the Venetian School were louder in their
complaints than even those of the Roman, the Siennese, and the
Neapolitan Schools; all whose causes of difference I have elsewhere
recounted, adding to them, whenever I found them admissible, my own
refutations. These it would be needless now to repeat, in reply to the
Venetian writers. I shall merely observe that Vasari bestowed very ample
commendations upon the Venetian professors, in different parts of his
history, and more particularly in the lives of Carpaccio, of Liberale,
and of Pordenone. Let me add that if he was occasionally betrayed into
errors, either from want of more correct information, or from a degree
of jealousy or spirit of patriotic rivalry, which probably may have
secretly influenced him in his opinions, it will be no difficult task in
the present enlightened period,[1] to substitute the real names, more
exact accounts, and more impartial examinations of the earlier
professors of the school.[2]
In respect to the more modern, up to whose period he did not reach, I
possess historical matter, which, if not very copious, is certainly less
scanty than such as relates to many of the other Schools of Italy.
Besides Ridolfi, Boschini, and Zanetti, it includes the historians of
the particular cities, the same from whom Orlandi selected his various
notices of artists; and among whom none is to be preferred to Signor
Zamboni for the fulness and authenticity of his materials, in his work,
entitled _Fabbriche di Brescia_. I am, moreover, in possession of
several authors who have distinctly treated of the lives, or published
other accounts of those who flourished in their own cities;--such as the
Commendatore del Pozzo, in his notice of the Veronese,[3] Count Tassi of
those of Bergamo, and Signor Verci of the Bassanese artists. And no
slight assistance may also be drawn from the different "_Guides_," or
descriptions of paintings, exhibited in many cities of the state,
although they are far from being all of equal merit. There is the "Guida
Trevigiana," of Rigamonti, that of Vicenza printed by Vendramini Mosca,
that of Brescia by Carboni, and that of Verona, expressly drawn from the
"_Verona Illustrata_" of the Marquis Maffei, with the still more
valuable one of Venice, dated 1733, from the able pen of Antonio M.
Zanetti. To these we may likewise add that first published by Rossetti,
now revised and improved by Brandolese, abounding with historical
memoirs of the painters of Padua; and the Guide of Rovigo by Bartoli,
communicating much new and interesting information, which serves to
point out more accurately certain eras among the professors of the art,
while the same may, in part, be observed of that of Bergamo, by the
Dottore Pasta. Nor are these all; for I am not a little indebted to
several notices published in the "Elogj" of Signor Longhi, and in some
of the catalogues of private collections; besides other anecdotes, in
part collected by myself, in part[4] communicated by my friends, and in
particular by the very accomplished Sig. Gio. Maria Sasso,[5] who has
already promised to gratify us with his "Venezia Pittrice," accompanied
with designs of the most esteemed paintings of this school, accurately
engraved.
[Footnote 1: It is observed by Signor Bottari, that Giorgio, in his life
of Franco, was too sparing of his praises of Tintoret and Paul Veronese;
and the same might be said also of Gambera, and many others, who
flourished at the same period, or were already deceased when he wrote.
To his opinions have succeeded those of the Caracci, and of many other
distinguished professors of the art, which may be safely relied upon.]
[Footnote 2: There very opportunely appeared, in the year 1800, at
Bassano, a "Notizia d'Opere di Disegno"--"Upon works of Design," the
anonymous production, apparently, of some inhabitant of Padua, about
1550. It was published and illustrated by the learned Abbate Morelli,
and contains several anecdotes, relating more particularly to the
Venetian School.]
[Footnote 3: The celebrated painter, Cignaroli, besides drawing up a
complete _Catalogue raisonne_, of the painters of Verona, already
published in the Chronicle of Zagata, vol. iii., left behind him MS.
notes upon the entire work of Pozzo, in the margin.]
[Footnote 4: I have been enabled in this edition, by means of Count Cav.
de Lazzara, to avail myself of a MS. from the pen of Natal Melchiori,
entitled, "_Lives of the Venetian Painters_," drawn up in 1728. The
author is deserving of credit, no less on account of having been himself
a painter, than from his personal acquaintance with the chief part of
those whose lives he commemorated.]
[Footnote 5: This excellent man is now no more, and his work has not
hitherto appeared. That, however, by the Sig. Co. Canonico de Rinaldis,
on the painters of Friuli, we have received. It embraces a much more
correct and enlarged view of that noble school, than we before possessed
in the scantier notices from the pen of Altan. Still he is not always
exact, and he would undoubtedly have written better, had he seen more.
At length, however, we are in possession of the work of Padre M.
Federici, in two volumes, relating to the artists of the "Marca
Trevigiana," accompanied by documents; a work better calculated than the
former to satisfy the expectations of a reader of taste. But, as is
generally the case, when an author hazards new opinions, we are
sometimes compelled to suspend our assent to his conclusions.]
VENETIAN SCHOOL.
EPOCH I.
_The Ancients._
If in the outset of each school of painting I were to pursue the example
held up in the _Etruria Pittrice_, of introducing the account of its
pictures by that of some work in mosaic, I ought here to mention those
of Grado, wrought in the sixth century, distinguished by the name of the
Patriarch Elia, those of Torcello, and a few other specimens that
appeared at Venice, in the islands, and in Terra Firma, produced at
periods subsequent to the increase of the edifices, together with the
grandeur of the Venetian state. But admitting that these mosaics, like
many at Rome, may really be the production of the Greeks; the title of
my work, confined as it is to painting, and to the period of its revival
in Italy, leads me to be little solicitous respecting those more ancient
monuments of the fine arts, remnants of which are to be found scattered
here and there, without any series of a school. I shall still, however,
occasionally allude to them, according as I find needful, were it only
for the sake of illustration and comparison, as I proceed. But such
information ought to be sought for in other works; mine professes only
to give the history of painting from the period of its revival.
The most ancient pictorial remains in the Venetian territories I believe
to be at Verona, in a subterraneous part of the nunnery of Santi Nazario
and Celso, which, however inaccessible to the generality of virtuosi,
have, nevertheless, been engraved on a variety of plates by order of the
indefatigable Signor Dionisi. In this, which was formerly the Chapel of
the Faithful, are represented several mysteries of our redemption; some
apostles, some holy martyrs, and in particular the transit of one of the
righteous from this life, on whom the archangel, St. Michael, is seen
bestowing his assistance. Here the symbols, the workmanship, the design,
the attitudes, the drapery of the figures, and the characters united,
permit us not to doubt that the painting must be much anterior to the
revival of the arts in Italy. But most writers seem to trace the
rudiments of Venetian painting from the eleventh century, about the year
1070, at the period when the Doge Selvo invited the mosaic workers from
Greece to adorn the magnificent temple, consecrated to St. Mark the
Evangelist. Such artificers, however rude, must have been acquainted, in
some degree, with the art of painting; none being enabled to work in
mosaic who had not previously designed and coloured, upon pasteboard or
cartoon, the composition they intended to execute.
And these, observe the same writers, were the first essays of the art of
painting in Venice. However this may be, it speedily took root, and
began to flourish after the year 1204, when Constantinople being taken,
Venice was in a short time filled, not indeed with Grecian artists, but
with their pictures, statues, and bassi relievi.[6] Had I not here
restricted my observations to existing specimens of the art, bestowing
only a rapid glance upon the rest, along with their authors, I might
prove, that from the above period, the city was no longer destitute of
artists; and was enabled, in the thirteenth century, to form a company
of them with their appropriate laws and institutions.
But of these elder masters of the art, there remains either only the
name, as of a Giovanni da Venezia and a Martinello da Bassano, or some
solitary relic of their labours without a name, as in the sarcophagus,
in wood, of the Beata Giuliana, painted about the year 1262, the same in
which she died. This monument remains in her own monastery of San Biagio
alla Guidecca, long held in veneration, even after the body of the
blessed saint had been removed, in the year 1297, into an urn of stone.
There are there represented San Biagio, the titular saint of the church,
San Cataldo, the bishop, and the blessed Giuliana, the two former in an
upright, the latter in a kneeling posture; their names are written in
Latin, and the style, although coarse, is nevertheless not Greek.
Probably that of the painter is also in the same corner, a picture of
whom, a Pieta, has recently been discovered by the Ab. Boni, who
considers him a new Cimabue of the Venetian art. As it has already been
described by him in his Florentine collection of "Opuscoli
Scientifici,"[7] I shall not extend my account of it; for the reader
will there find other names, as will afterwards be shewn, recently
discovered by the indefatigable author of some early Venetian writers,
until this period unknown to history. Among these are Stefano Pievano,
of S. Agnese, a picture by whom, dated 1381, is described; Alberegno,
belonging to the fifteenth century, and one Esegrenio, who flourished
somewhat later, to which time we may refer two fine and highly valued
figures of holy virgins, not long since discovered, of Tommaso da
Modena, and which, from the disputes they have elicited, have been
subjected to experiments at Florence, to ascertain whether they are
painted in oil or distemper--experiments that tend only to prove that
this Tommaso was unacquainted with the art of colouring in oil.
It was only subsequent to the year 1300, that the names, united to the
productions of the Venetians, began to make themselves manifest; when,
partly by the examples held out by Giotto, partly by their own assiduity
and talent, the painters of the city and of the state visibly improved,
and softened the harshness of their manner. Giotto, according to a MS.
cited by Rossetti,[8] was at Padua in 1306; according to Vasari, he
returned from Avignon in 1316; and a little while afterwards he was
painting at Verona, in the palace of Can della Scala, and at Padua,
employed on a chapel in the church of the titular saint. He adds, that
towards the close of his days he was again invited there, and
embellished other places with his pieces. Nothing, however, remains of
him in Verona; but in Padua there still exists the chapel of the
Nunziata all'Arena, divided all round into compartments, in each of
which is represented some scriptural event. It is truly surprising to
behold, not less on account of its high state of preservation, beyond
any other of his frescos, than for its full expression of native grace,
together with that air of grandeur which Giotto so well knew how to
unite. With respect to the chapel, it is believed that Vasari was less
accurately informed, inasmuch as Savonarola, who has been cited by Sig.
Morelli,[9] relates that Giotto ornamented the little church of the
Arena, _capitulumque Antonii nostri_, and the chapter _of our St.
Antony_. And in fact, in the apartment of the chapter house, there yet
remain several traces of ancient painting, though turned white with age.
In a very ancient MS., of the year 1312,[10] there is made mention of
his also having been employed _in Palatio Comitis_, which others suppose
ought to be read _Communis_, intended to apply to the Saloon, of which I
shall shortly have to give some account.
To Giotto succeeded Giusto Padovano, so called from the place of his
naturalization and usual residence; being, in truth, a Florentine,
sprung from the family of the Menabuoi. As a disciple of Giotto, Vasari
attributes to him the very extensive work which adorns the church of St.
John the Baptist. In the picture over the altar, if it be his, Giusto
has exhibited various histories of St. John the Baptist; on the walls
are represented both scriptural events and mysteries of the Apocalypse;
and on the cupola he has drawn a Choir of Angels, where we behold, as if
in a grand consistory, the blessed arrayed in various garments, seated
upon the ground; simple, indeed, in its conception, but executed with an
incredible degree of diligence and felicity. It is mentioned in the
_Notizia Morelli_, that formerly there was to be read there an
inscription over one of the gates--_Opus Johannis et Antonii de
Padua_,--probably companions of Giusto, and, probably, as is conjectured
by the author of the MS. above alluded to, the painters of the whole
temple. This would seem to augment the number of the Paduan artists, no
less than the imitators of Giotto; since the works, already described,
are equally as much in his manner as those by Taddeo Gaddi, or any other
of his fellow pupils in Florence. The same commendation is bestowed upon
Jacopo Davanzo, of whom I treat more at length in the school of Bologna.
A less faithful follower of Giotto was Guariento, a Paduan, held in high
esteem about the year 1360, as appears from the honourable commissions
he obtained from the Venetian senate. One of his frescos and a
crucifixion yet remain at Bassano;[11] and in the choir of the
Eremitani, at Padua, there are many of his figures now retouched, from
which Zanetti took occasion to commend him for his rich invention, the
spirit of his attitudes, and the felicity with which, at so early a
period, he disposed his draperies. At Padua there is an ancient church,
dedicated to St. George, erected about 1377, which boasts some history
pieces of St. James, executed by the hand of Alticherio, or Aldigieri,
da Zevio in the Veronese; and others of St. John, the work of one
Sebeto,[12] says the historian, a native of Verona. These, likewise,
approach pretty nearly the style of Giotto, and more especially the
first, who painted also a good deal in his native place.
To these two I may add Jacopo da Verona, known only by his numerous
paintings in fresco at San Michele of Padua, which remain in part
entire; and Taddeo Bartoli, of Siena, who has shewn himself ambitious at
the Arena, of emulating the contiguous labours of Giotto, without
attaining the object in view. Another production of the same period is
seen in the great hall at Padua, reported to be one of the largest in
the world, consisting, as it does, of a mixture of sacred historic
pieces, of celestial signs borrowed from Igino, and of the various
operations carried on during the respective months of the year, besides
several other ideas certainly furnished by some learned man of that age.
It is partly the work, says Morelli in his _Notizia_, upon the authority
of Campagnuola, of an artist of Ferrara, and partly that of Gio.
Miretto, a Paduan. This recent discovery justifies my own previous
opinions, having been unable to prevail upon myself to ascribe such a
production to Giotto, although it partakes strongly of his style, which
appears to have spread pretty rapidly throughout the territories of
Padua, of Verona, of Bergamo, and great part of the Terra Ferma.
Besides this manner, which may be, in some measure, pronounced foreign,
there are others equally observable in Venice, no less than in Treviso,
in the Chapter of the Padri Predicatori, and in other of the subject
cities, and these might more accurately be termed national, so remote
are they from the style of Giotto, and that of his disciples before
mentioned. I have elsewhere pointed out how far the miniature painters
contributed to this degree of originality, a class of artists, with whom
Italy, at no time destitute, more fully abounded about that period,
while they still continued to improve by employing their talents in
drawing objects from the life, and not from any Greek or Italian model.
Indeed they had already made no slight advances in every branch of
painting, when Giotto first arrived in those parts. I have myself seen,
in the grand collection of MSS., made in Venice, by the Abbate Canonici,
a book of the Evangelists, obtained in Udine, illustrated with
miniatures in pretty good taste for the thirteenth century, in which
they were produced; and similar relics are by no means rare throughout
the libraries of the state. I suspect, therefore, that many of those new
painters, either having been pupils of the miniaturists, or induced to
imitate them from the near connexion between the arts, attempted to vie
with them in design, in the distribution of their colours, and in their
compositions. Hence, it is clearly accounted for, why they did not
become the disciples, though acquainted with the works of Giotto, but
produced several respectable pieces of their own.
To this class belongs M. Paolo, whom Zanetti found recorded in an
ancient parchment, bearing the date of 1346. He is the earliest in the
national manner, of whom there exists a work with the indisputable name
of its author. It is to be seen in the great church of St. Mark,
consisting of a tablet, or, as it is otherwise called, _Ancona_, divided
into several compartments, representing the figure of a dead Christ,
with some of the Apostles, and historic incidents from the holy
Evangelist. There is inscribed underneath--_Magister Paulus cum Jacobo,
et Johanne filiis fecit hoc opus_; and Signor Zanetti, page 589,
observes in regard to it as follows:--_Among the specimens of simple
painting, in St. Mark's, the ball centre of the great altar is
remarkable for several small tablets of gold and silver, on which are
painted several figures in the ancient Greek manner. San Pietro Urseolo
had it constructed about the year 980, at Constantinople, and it was
removed to this place in the time of the Doge Ordelafo Faliero, in 1102,
though it was afterwards renovated by command of the Doge Pietro Ziani,
in 1209._ This historian did not discover the inscription which I found
upon it in the year 1782. The artist is sufficiently distinguished for
the period in which he flourished, although the stiffness in the design,
false action, and expression, beyond those of the best followers of
Giotto, are perceptible, so much as to remind us of the Greek specimens
of art.[13]
There can, likewise, be no doubt, that a painter of the name of Lorenzo,
was one of these Venetians, whose altarpiece in St. Antony of Castello,
to which is attached his name, with the date of 1358, _paid him three
hundred gold ducats_, has been commended by Zanetti. Besides, we read
inscribed on a picture belonging to the noble house of Ercolani, at
Bologna, the words MANU LAURENTII DE VENETIIS, 1368; and there is every
appearance of his being the author of the fresco in the church of
Mezzaratta, not far from Bologna, representing Daniel in the lions' den;
and bearing the signature of _Laurentius, P._ It is a work that bears no
resemblance to the style of Giotto, and appears to have been completed
about the year 1370. It is equally certain that Niccolo Semitecolo was a
Venetian, he having also inscribed his name as we find it written upon a
TRINITY, which represents the Virgin, along with some histories of St.
Sebastian, still preserved in the chapter library of Padua:--"Nicoleto
Semitecolo da Veniexia impense, 1367." The work is an excellent specimen
of this school; the naked parts are tolerably well drawn, and the
proportions of the figures, though sometimes extravagantly so, are bold
and free; and what is more important to our present purpose, it
discovers no resemblance to the style of Giotto, being inferior in point
of design, though equal to him in regard to the colouring. Two other
painters, whose style betrays nothing of Giotto, were discovered by
Signor Sasso, in Venice, upon the strength of two altarpieces, to which
they had affixed their names. Upon one, found in the convent of _Corpus
Domini_, he read _Angelus pinxit_; and upon the other, also in the same
place, _Katarinus pinxit_. While on this subject, I ought not to pass
over the opinion of Baldinucci himself, who always appears to have
respected the freedom and independence of the Venetian as opposed to the
Florentine school, by refusing to insert the name of a single Venetian
in his tree of Cimabue. He merely maintained, that the Venetian painters
had improved their style by the labours of Angiol Gaddi, and of one
Antonio, a Venetian, whom, in spite of the authority of Vasari, he has
declared to be a Florentine; on which point we must refer to what has
already been stated in the first volume (p. 61) of this work. Moreover,
he asserts of the same Antonio, that he took up his residence at Venice,
and thence acquired the appellation of Veneziano; but that he took his
departure again, owing to the intrigues of the national professors, as
much as to say, of a school formed anterior to his arrival. And so long
anterior was it, indeed, that the whole state, as well as the adjacent
places, abounded not less with pictures than with pupils, although few
of their names with their productions have survived.[14]
Among these few is a Simon da Cusighe, who painted an altarpiece and a
fresco, still remaining in his native parish, situated near the city of
Belluno, where there exist memorials of one Pietro, and other artists of
the thirteenth century, along with some very tolerably executed figures,
bearing the epigraph of _Simon pinxit_. To these I add a native of
Friuli, of whom there are no authentic remains beyond Gemona, where he
painted the facade of the dome, and under a picture of the martyrdom of
I know not what saint, appears his name written, MCCCXXXII. MAGISTER
NICOLAUS PINTOR ME FECIT. To this artist is ascribed, by some writers,
that vast and meritorious production, still in such a fine state of
preservation, ornamenting the dome of Venzone, and which represents the
solemn scene of the Consecration; but its author is a matter of mere
conjecture, founded in this instance upon the vicinity of the place and
time, and resemblance of manner. There are also Pecino and Pietro de
Nova, who employed their talents, during a period of many years
subsequent to 1363, in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, at Bergamo.
But these, like the artist of Padua before mentioned, approach very
nearly the composition of Giotto, and possibly might have imbibed such a
taste at Milan.[15]
The splendor of Venetian painting becomes more strikingly manifest in
the fifteenth century; a period that was gradually preparing the way for
the grand manner of the Titians and the Giorgioni. The new style took
its rise in one of the islands called Murano; but it was destined to
attain its perfection in Venice. I first recognized the work of one of
the oldest of these artists, subscribing himself, _Quiricius de
Muriano_, in the studio of Signor Sasso. It represents our Saviour in a
sitting posture, at whose feet stands a veiled devotee; but there is no
mark by which to ascertain its age. There is, likewise, of uncertain
date, yet still very ancient, a Bernardino da Murano, of whose
productions Zanetti saw nothing more than a rude altarpiece. An Andrea
da Murano flourished about the period 1400, whose style, whatever it may
retain of harsh and dry, neither superior in composition, nor in choice
of features to that of his predecessors, discovers him to have been
tolerably skilful in design, even in regard to the extremities, and in
placing his figures well in the canvass.
There remains in his native place, at San Pier Martire, an altarpiece
painted by his hand, in which a St. Sebastian forms so conspicuous a
figure for the beauty of its torso, that Zanetti suspects it must have
been copied from some ancient statue. It is he who introduced the art
into the house of the Vivarini, his compatriots, who in a continued line
of succession preserved the school of Murano for nearly a century; and
who produced as rich a harvest of their labours in Venice, as did the
Campi afterwards in the city of Cremona, or the Procaccini in Milan. I
shall treat of them with brevity, but with such new sources of
information, as will at once serve to correct and amplify what has
already been written.
The first among the Vivarini mentioned by historians is Luigi, of whom a
painting at Santi Giovanni e Paolo, has been cited by them, which
represents our Redeemer bearing the cross upon his shoulders. The work
has been a good deal retouched, and there has been added to it another
portion, which gives the name of the author, dated 1414. Not being an
autograph, we are led to suspect some kind of mistake attaching either
to the name or the date; there having been another Luigi Vivarini, as we
shall shew, towards the close of the century. The one in question, then,
might probably be an ancestor of the latter, though it be difficult to
persuade ourselves of it, as there remains no other superscription, or
notice of any of that name so ancient.
Next to this artist, according to Ridolfo and Zanetti, are to be
enumerated Giovanni and Antonio Vivarini, who flourished about the year
1440. The authority they adduce for this, is an altarpiece in San
Pantaleone, which bears the inscription of _Zuane e Antonio da Muran
pense 1444_. But this Giovanni,[16] if I mistake not, is the same who
signs his name on another picture in Venice, _Joannes de Alemania et
Antonius de Muriano pinxit_; or as it is thus written in Padua, _Antonio
de Muran e Zohan Alamanus pinxit_. Giovanni, therefore, was a companion
of Antonio, a German by birth; and traces of a foreign style are clearly
perceptible in his paintings. The reason of his omitting to insert his
birthplace in the picture at San Pantaleone, arose, I suspect, from the
fact of his name and acquaintance with Antonio being too well known to
admit of doubt. After the year 1447 there is no more mention made of
Giovanni, but only of Antonio; sometimes alone, sometimes together with
some other of the Vivarini. Thus, his name is subscribed alone in San
Antonio Abate di Pesaro, upon an altarpiece of the titular saint,
surrounded by the figures of three young martyrs, with some smaller
paintings attached; the production of a very animated colourist, and
displaying forms inferior to none in the school of Murano. I have seen
two other specimens, in which he is mentioned together with a second
Vivarino. The least excellent of these is to be found in San Francesco
Grande, at Padua, consisting of a Madonna, with some saints, in various
compartments; and, at the foot of it, is the following memorandum, _Anno
1451, Antonius et Bartholomeus fratres de Murano pinxerunt hoc opus_.
Similar to this, the two brothers had produced another the year
preceding, in the Certosa of Bologna, where it is still in a high state
of preservation, beyond any other specimen I have seen belonging to this
family. There is much worthy of commendation in each figure of the whole
piece; features dignified and devout; appropriate dresses; care in the
disposition of the hair and beards, united to a colouring warm and
brilliant.
According to what appears, Bartolommeo must have been held of less
account than Antonio, until the discovery of painting in oil being
introduced into Venice, he became one among the first to profit by it,
and, towards the period in which the two Bellini appeared, was held in
pretty high repute.
The first specimen of his painting in oil exists at S. Giovanni e Paolo,
not far from the gate, and exhibits, among other saints, P. San
Agostino, with an indication of the year 1473. From that period he
continued to distinguish himself, producing a great number of pieces
both in oil and in water colour, sometimes with more, and sometimes with
less care, but always in the ancient taste for subdividing the
altarpiece into several parts, in each of which he represented separate
heads or entire figures. In these he often marked the name of Vivarino,
with the year of their production; and occasionally he has added a finch
or linnet by way of allusion to his family name. His last work, bearing
the date of the year, is a Christ risen from the dead, at San Giovanni,
in Bragora, where Boschini read the date of 1498, which is now no longer
apparent; but it is a piece which, in every part, may be said to vie
with that of the best Venetian artists who flourished during the same
period.
Contemporary with him was a Luigi of the same name, one of whose
productions was seen by Zanetti, in a collection of paintings, with the
date of 1490, and as appeared to him, strongly approaching, in point of
taste, to the best style of Bartolommeo. To Luigi, also, must
undoubtedly be ascribed the altarpiece, which, in San Francesco di
Trevigi, bears his name. There is another at the Battuti, in Belluno,
representing the saints Piero, Girolamo, and some others, a work which
cost that school 100 gold ducats, besides the expenses of the artist,
who has attached to it his name. But superior to every other of his
existing specimens, is that fine picture in the school of San Girolamo,
at Venice, in which he represented a history of the titular saint, in
emulation of Giovanni Bellino, whom he here equalled, and of Carpaccio,
whom he surpassed. He has drawn the saint in the act of caressing a
lion, while several monks are seen flying in terror at the sight. The
composition is very fine; the passions are tolerably well pourtrayed,
the colours as soft and delicate as in any other of the Vivarini; the
architecture solid, and in the ancient taste, while the epoch is more
modern than that which could be ascribed to the supposed Luigi, the
elder. Such is our exposition of the whole series of the School of
Murano, up to the period of its greatest improvement, so as to bring it
under one point of view. I shall now, therefore, resume the thread of my
narrative, relating to the elder artists of the fourteenth century, who
competed with the oldest of the school of Murano, until the era of
painting in oil; and I shall afterwards proceed to treat apart of the
more modern.
In the early part of the century, an artist of the name of Gentile da
Fabriano, had been employed in the public palace at Venice, highly
distinguished in his time, but of whom I must not here repeat what has
been said in the first volume of this work. He there depicted a naval
battle scene, a production greatly extolled in former times, which has
long since perished. He produced, also, some disciples, as we find
mention of a Jacopo Nerito, from Padua, who, in a painting at San
Michele di Padova, according to Rossetti, subscribes himself one of his
pupils. Nasocchio di Bassano, the elder, is to be ranked also, either as
one of his scholars or his imitators, if, indeed, a small picture
pointed out to me by the late Signor Verci was by his hand.
Among other Venetians, Jacopo Bellini, at once the father and the master
of Gentile and Giovanni of the same name, of whom more hereafter, was
certainly a pupil of Gentile da Fabriano. Jacopo, however, is better
known by the celebrity of his sons, than by his own works, at this time
either destroyed or unknown. He had painted in the school of S. Giovanni
Evangelista at Venice, and in the chapel of the Gatta Melata, at the
Santo di Padova, about 1456; but these labours survive only in history,
nor have I met with any other specimen besides a Madonna, discovered by
Sig. Sasso, bearing the signature of its author. The style appears taken
from that of Squarcione, to which he is supposed to have applied himself
in his more advanced years.
There was also another Jacopo in very high repute,[17] called Jacobello
del Fiore, who has been falsely accused by Vasari, of having drawn his
figures all resting on the tip of their toes, in the manner of the
Greeks. His father, Francesco, was considered in the light of a
Coryphaeus of the art, and his tomb is still to be seen at Santi Giovanni
e Paolo, with a figure of him in his toga, and a commendatory epitaph in
Latin verse. No works of his, however, are to be seen in Venice,[18] a
dittico, or small altar, with his name having been conveyed to London,
bearing the date of 1412. It was obtained by the Chevalier Strange,
together with some other productions of the old Venetian artists. The
son of Francesco rose to a still higher degree of celebrity. He began to
make himself known as early as 1401, by producing an altarpiece at San
Cassiano di Pesaro, in which city I discovered another, with the date of
1409, and both bear the signature of _Jacometto de Flor_. A much nobler
work is a coronation of the Virgin, in the cathedral of Ceneda,
extremely rich in figures, insomuch as to have deserved the name of the
"Painting of Paradise," in a MS. of the lives of the bishops of that
place, which is preserved in the episcopal residence, and declares the
work to have been executed, _ab eximio illius temporis pictore Jacobello
de Flore_, 1432, at the expense of the bishop, Ant. Correr. There is a
Madonna, indisputably by his hand, in possession of Sig. Girolamo
Manfrini, painted in 1436, besides the _Giustizia_, drawn between two
archangels, in the _Magistrato del Proprio_, bearing the date of 1421. I
may venture to say that few artists of that time equalled him; both on
account of his having few rivals who had so early ventured to attempt
drawing figures as large as the life, and because of his power of
conferring upon them a certain grace and dignity, and, where called for,
a vigour and ease rarely to be met with in other paintings. The two
lions which he represented as symbols of his _Giustizia_ (Justice), are
truly grand, though the rest of the figures would have appeared to more
advantage had they been less loaded with ornaments, and in particular
the draperies glowing with gold lace, according to the custom of his
age. He had a rival in Giacomo Morazone, known by an altarpiece seen in
the island of St. Elena, of which I shall have to speak elsewhere.
Two pupils of Jacobello are recorded by Ridolfi, one of whom, Donato, is
superior to his master in point of style, and the other, Carlo Crivelli,
of whom the capital can boast only one or two pieces, and of whom little
mention is made in Venetian history. It would appear that he long
resided out of his native place, and in the Marca Trevigiana, from which
circumstance we find him repeatedly named in the _Storia Picena_, in the
_Guida di Ascoli_, and in the catalogue of Fabrianese paintings. At San
Francesco di Matelica, I saw an altarpiece and _grado_ by his hand, with
his name in the following inscription--_Carolus Crivellus Venetus miles
pinxit_, as well as another with his name at the Osservanti, in
Macerata, and a third which bears the year 1476, in possession of the
Cardinal Zelada. He is an artist more remarkable for his force of
colouring than for his correctness of design: and his principal merit
consists in those little history pieces, in which he has represented
beautiful landscapes, and given to his figures grace, motion, and
expression, with some traces of the colouring of the School of Perugia.
Hence his productions have occasionally been taken for those of Pietro,
as in the instance of that in Macerata; and if I mistake not, such an
opinion was entertained, even by the learned Father Civalli, (p. 60). In
Piceno, likewise, in Monsanmartino, or in Penna S. Giovanni, there
remain altarpieces by Vittorio Crivelli, a Venetian, most probably of
the same family, and produced in the years 1489 and 90, from which
period I lose sight of him, whether owing to his early decease, or his
having set out in pursuit of better fortune into foreign parts.
Hitherto we have examined only the productions of the capital and of the
annexed island. But in each of the other cities, now comprehended in the
state, there flourished painters during the same period, guided by
maxims differing both from those of Venice and of Murano. The School of
Bergamo had even then made distinguished progress under the direction of
the two Nova, who died at the commencement of the century; and mention
is made of a Commenduno, one of their pupils, besides some other
contemporaries, whose works, however, cannot, with any degree of
certainty, be pointed out. The same may be said of those in the adjacent
city of Brescia, which could then, also, boast of possessing some
excellent artists. Of these, there is nothing more than the name now
remaining, yet Brandolin Testorino and Ottaviano Brandino are names
placed in competition with that of Gentile di Fabriano, and, perhaps,
they are preferred to him. The former was supposed to have been engaged
along with Altichiero, in ornamenting the great hall in Padua, entitled
_Sala de' Giganti_.[19]
Subsequent to both of these appeared Vincenzio Foppa, of Brescia,
founder of an ancient school at Milan, of which I shall treat more at
length in the following book. Vasari makes mention of a Vincenzio da
Brescia, or Vincenzio Verchio, who is the same Vincenzo Civerchio di
Crema, commended by Ridolfo, and so much admired by the French in the
capture of Crema, that they fixed upon one of his pictures, then
ornamenting the public palace, to be presented to their king, and to
this artist we shall also again allude.
About the commencement of the fifteenth century there flourished, in
Verona, an artist of the name of Stefano,[20] declared, as it appears to
me, by Vasari, sometimes a native of Verona, sometimes of Zevio, a
territory adjacent to the former. The same author makes honourable
mention of him in several places, exalting him above the best disciples
of Angiolo Gaddi, to whose style, judging from what I have myself
observed at San Fermo and elsewhere, he added a certain dignity and
beauty of form, while such was his excellence in frescos, as to be
extolled by Donatello beyond any of the artists who were then known for
similar compositions in those parts.[21]
The Commendatore del Pozzo brings his labours down as far as the year
1463, an incredible assertion, as applied to a scholar of Gaddi. To this
period might better be referred Vincenzio di Stefano, apparently one of
his sons, of whom nothing survives but his name, and the tradition of
having conferred the first lessons of the art upon Liberale.
Highly distinguished, on the other hand, both by the consent of the
Veronese and of foreigners, is the name of Vittor Pisanello; although
there exists great confusion of dates in his history. Vasari makes him a
disciple of Castagno, who died about the year 1480; yet del Pozzo
informs us that he has in his house a holy figure, with the annexed
signature of Vittore, and dated 1406, most probably before the birth of
Castagno. Again we are told by Oretti that he was in possession of one
of his medals, representing the Sultan Mahomet, struck in the year 1481,
a supposition which, admitting the picture of Pozzo, we are unable to
reconcile to facts, so that the medal was, perhaps, taken from some
painting of Pisanello, coloured at a former time. To whatever master
Vittore may have been indebted, certain it is that several of his too
partial admirers have placed him above Masaccio, in regard to the
services rendered by him towards the progress of the art, though
impartial judges will not refuse to give him a station near him. The
whole of his labours, both in Venice and in Rome, have now perished. At
Verona, also, little remains; even that noble piece of San Eustachio, so
highly extolled by Vasari himself, having been destroyed; and his
_Nunziata_, at San Fermo, being greatly defaced by time, in which,
however, is still visible a country house, thrown into such admirable
perspective, as to delight the beholder. There remain several little
altarpieces, containing histories of San Bernardino, finished in the
style of the miniaturists, in the sacristy of San Francesco; but they
are crude in their colouring, and the figures more than usually long and
dry. The _Guide_ of the city announces them as the productions of
Pisanello; but there is no authority for this, and upon the strength of
a date of 1473, which is seen upon one of them, I do not scruple to
pronounce them by another hand. He is commended by Facio, (p. 47) for
his almost poetical style of expression; and there is a specimen of an
effort at caricature, with which Vittore embellished his historic
painting of Frederick Barbarossa, in the ducal palace at Venice. He is,
moreover, praised by the same author for his skill in drawing horses and
other animals, in which he surpassed every other artist. His name is not
unknown to the antiquaries; many medals struck by him, of different
princes, being found in museums, which acquired for him, in an equal
degree with his pictures, the esteem and applauses of Guarino, of
Vespasiano Strozza, of Biondo, and of several other distinguished
scholars.
In the adjacent city of Vicenza, resided a Jacopo Tintorello, strongly
resembling Vittore in his style of colouring, however inferior to him in
the perfection of his design, as far as we are enabled to judge from a
picture of the Saviour, with a crown of thorns, exhibited at Santa
Corona; a piece which reflects credit upon that school. It is yet more
highly honoured by an _Epiphany_, painted in San Bartolommeo, by
Marcello Figolino, an artist commemorated by Ridolfi, under the name of
Giovanni Batista, and who flourished, according to his account, at the
period of the two Montagna. He must, however, at that time, have been
far advanced in years, if it be true that the era of his birth preceded
that of Gian Bellini.[22] His manner is undoubtedly original; so much
so, that I find nothing resembling it, either in Venice or elsewhere; it
embraces great diversity of countenance, and of costume, skilful
gradation of light and shade, with landscape and perspective; and is
remarkable for ornament, and the finish and smoothness of every part. It
was fully entitled to render its author the father of a new epoch in the
history of art; if, indeed, we are to believe him, which does not
sufficiently appear, to be as ancient as has been affirmed.
Up to this period I have described the merits of the artists of the city
and of the state, who appeared in the early part of the century; but I
have not yet recorded its greatest master; I mean Squarcione, of Padua,
who from his ability in bringing up pupils, was pronounced by his
followers the first master of painters, and continued to educate them
until they amounted to 137. Ambitious of seeing more of the world, he
not only traversed the whole of Italy, but passing into Greece, he took
designs of the best specimens, both in painting and sculpture, of every
thing he met with, besides purchasing several. On returning to his
native place, he began to form a studio, which proved the richest of any
known at that period, not merely in designs, but in statues, torsos,
bassi relievi, and funereal urns. Thus devoting himself to the
instruction of students, with such copies, aided by his precepts, rather
than by his own example, he continued to live in comparative affluence,
and divided many of the commissions which he received among his
different pupils. In the church of the Misericordia is preserved a book
of anthems, illustrated with very beautiful miniatures, commonly
ascribed to Mantegna, the ornament of that school: but so great is the
variety of the different styles, that the most competent judges conclude
it to be one of the works committed to Squarcione, and by him
distributed among his disciples. Of these we are not yet prepared to
treat, the chief part of whom are known to have flourished subsequent to
the introduction of painting in oils, while little can be said of the
productions of Squarcione himself, though much in respect to his labours
as a master. And, indeed, he may be considered the stock, as it were,
whose branches we trace, through Mantegna, in the grand school of
Lombardy; through Marco Zoppo in the Bolognese; while it extended some
degree of influence over that of Venice itself. For Jacopo Bellini,
having come to exercise his talents in Padua, it would appear that he
took Squarcione for his model, as before stated.
There is nothing remaining from the hand of Squarcione, in Padua, that
can be relied upon with certainty, except an altarpiece, formerly to be
seen at the Carmelitani, but now in possession of the accomplished Conte
Cav. de' Lazara. It is drawn in different compartments; the chief place
is occupied by the figure of San Girolamo. Around him appear other
saints; but the work is in parts re-touched, though there is sufficient
of what is original to establish the character of the painter. Rich in
colouring, in expression, and above all in perspective, it may be
declared one of the best specimens of the art produced in those parts.
The painting of the altarpiece, here alluded to, was assigned him by the
noble family of the Lazara, of which the contract is still preserved by
them, dated 1449, the salary being paid in 1452, the period at which it
was completed. The artist subscribes himself _Francesco Squarcione_,
whence we are enabled to correct the mistake of Vasari, who, invariably
unfortunate in his nomenclature of the Venetians, announces his name as
Jacopo, an error repeated also in the dictionaries of artists. Besides
this specimen, there still exist, in a cloister of San Francesco Grande,
some histories of that saint in _terra verde_, which are to be referred
to the early part of his life, there being good authority for believing
them to be by the same hand, though with the assistance of his school,
as the more and less perfect parts render sufficiently apparent. Near
them were placed some other pieces of Squarcione also in _terra verde_,
which were defaced in the time of Algarotti, who regrets their loss in
one of his elegant and pleasing letters. Their style is altogether
analogous to that of his school; animated figures, neat in the folds,
foreshortenings not usual in works of that age, and attempts, though yet
immature, at approaching towards the style of the ancient Greeks.
Proceeding from Padua, in the direction of Germany, we meet with some
anonymous paintings, in the districts of Trevigi and Friuli, which
ought, apparently, to be referred to this epoch; so far removed are they
in style from the nobler method, we shall shortly have to describe. The
name of Antonio is well known in Treviso, an artist who produced a S.
Cristoforo, of gigantic stature, tolerably well executed, in San
Niccolo, and that of Liberale da Campo, author of a _Presepio_, which is
placed in the cathedral. Superior to both of these must have been
Giorgio da Trevigi, if we are to believe Rossetti, where he mentions his
introduction into Padua, in 1437, in order to paint the celebrated tower
of the Horologe. There exist other pictures of the fourteenth century,
more or less perfect, interspersed throughout the Marca Trevigiana, and
more particularly in Serravalle. Other places in Italy, indeed, bear the
same name, derived from the inclosed form of the mountains; this,
however, is the largest of the whole, being a rich and ornate city,
where Titian was in the habit of spending some months in the year at the
house of his son-in-law, by way of amusement, and has left there several
memorials of his art. But the whole of the church of the Battuti appears
ornamented in a more antique taste, executed in such a manner, that I
was assured, by a person who witnessed it, that it most of all resembled
a sacred museum of art. The whole must have been the work of the same
artists that we have just been recording in other cities, inasmuch as
the names of no natives are known beyond the single one of Valentina.
He, indeed, verged upon the improved age; but in Ceneda, that boasts
various altarpieces of his hand, as well as in Serravalle itself, where
he painted another, with some saints of the Holy Family, he still
appears a disciple of the ancients, and a copyist of Squarcione, of
Padua. We shall soon discover more celebrated artists rising up in this
province, after the introduction into the Trevigiana, of the method of
the Bellini.
The artists of Friuli availed themselves of it less early, not having
sufficiently imbibed the principles of modern taste, even as late as the
year 1500, either, in the opinion of Rinaldis, from the secluded
situation of the place, or from the disturbed and revolutionary
character of the times. Hence it is that the provincial painters of that
period are to be referred wholly to this, not to the subsequent era of
the art. To such belongs Andrea Bellunello, of San Vito, whose
masterpiece is a Crucifixion, among various saints, with the date of
1475, exhibited in the great council chamber at Udine. It has some merit
in regard to the size, and the distribution of its figures; but displays
neither beauty of forms, nor colour, and we might almost pronounce it an
ancient piece of tapestry, when placed by the side of a beautiful
picture. Nevertheless, in his own district, he was considered the Zeuxis
and Apelles of his age.[23] Contemporary with him, was Domenico di
Tolmezzo, who painted an altarpiece in various compartments for the
cathedral of Udine; a Madonna, in the taste of those times, with some
saints, figures which all partake of the ancient Venetian style, even to
the colouring, insomuch that one might believe him to have been a
disciple of that school. He has attached his name and the year, 1479,
and it would appear that there belonged to the same piece, exhibiting a
figure of the blessed Bertrando, Patriarch of Aquileja, two oblong
tablets, one of which represents his offering of alms, the other the
circumstances of the death he suffered. The whole of these paintings,
which I have noticed, are tolerably executed, in particular the two
histories, and are preserved in two chambers of the Canonica. Not far
from the same place is seen a figure of the saint, in fresco, painted by
Francesco de Alessiis, in 1494, and placed over the door of a house,
formerly the college of S. Girolamo.
While the schools of the state thus continued to advance, a knowledge of
design became more general in Venice; and in the latter part of the
century, its artists, for the most part, had acquired a taste similar to
what I have already described as influencing those of other places--a
taste rather removed from the antique coarseness, than adorned with the
elegance of the moderns. Although the use of canvass had been already
adopted in Venice, like that of boards elsewhere, a circumstance for
which Vasari accounts, in treating of the Bellini, there was no
composition besides water colours, or distemper; excellent, indeed, for
the preservation of tints, as we perceive from unfaded specimens in the
present day, but unfriendly to the production of union, smoothness, and
softness. At length appeared the secret of colouring in oils from
Flanders, a discovery conferring a happier era upon the Italian Schools,
and in particular upon that of Venice, which availed itself of it above
every other, and apparently the very first of all. In the Florentine
School I have described the origin of this invention, ascribing it,
along with Vasari, to Giovanni Van Eych, and both there and in the
Neapolitan, I have also shewn that the first who communicated it to
Italy was Antonello da Messina, having been instructed in it by Giovanni
himself in Flanders. The historical account of this Messinese, as I have
repeatedly before observed, has never been sufficiently elucidated.
Vasari and Ridolfi state such facts respecting him as are not easily
reconcilable to the period of life in general assigned to him, reaching
only to forty-nine years; and I have proved, in collecting memorials, to
which they had no access, alluded to in the Neapolitan School, that
there were two distinct visits made by Antonello to Venice. The first,
it appears to me, must have taken place soon after his return into
Italy; at which time he concealed the discovery from every one, except
it were Domenico Veneziano, who is known to have availed himself of it
for many years, both in Venice and elsewhere. During that period
Antonello visited other places, and more especially Milan, whence he
returned to Venice for the second time, and as it is said, _received a
public salary_, and then he divulged the method of painting in oils to
the Venetian professors; a circumstance which, according to the
superscriptions attached to his pictures, appears to have taken place
about the year 1474. Other signatures are to be met with as late as
1490, insomuch that he must have run a longer career than that which has
above been assigned him. And we are here arrived at an era, at once the
happiest and most controverted of any. But of the Venetians we shall
treat presently, after alluding to the works of this foreign artist
apart. Two altarpieces by his hand are recorded, which were painted for
the two churches of the Dominante, besides several Madonnas, and other
holy pieces intended for private houses, together with some few
productions in fresco. There is no doubt but he also produced many
others, both at the instance of natives and of foreigners, relieving
himself from the multiplicity of his commissions by the aid of Pino di
Messina, the same who is commended in the memoirs of Hackert, as the
pupil and companion of Antonello's labours at Venice. It is not
mentioned whether he produced any specimens of his art in Sicily, nor am
I certain whether he returned thither. In many Venetian collections,
however, they are still preserved, and display a very correct taste,
united to a most delicate command of the pencil; and among others is a
portrait in the possession of the family Martinengo, bearing the
inscription _Antonellus Messaneus me fecit, 1474_.
In the council hall of the Ten is also to be seen one of his pictures of
a Pieta, half-length, subscribed, _Antonius Messinensis_. The features
of the countenances, though animated, are not at all select, nor have
much of the Italian expression; and his colours in this and other of his
productions that I have seen, are less vivid than in some Venetian
artists of that age, who carried the perfection of colouring to its
highest pitch.
There is good authority for believing that, together with Antonello, or
very near the same period, there flourished in Venice one of the best
Flemish disciples of Giovanni Van Eych; called by Vasari, Ruggieri da
Bruggia. There appears, in the Palazzo Nani, adorned by its present
owner in the hereditary taste of his noble family, with the most
splendid monuments of antiquity, a San Girolamo between two holy
virgins, a picture, as is shewn from the following inscription, by his
hand,--_Sumus Rugerii manus_. It is drawn with more merit in point of
colouring than of design, upon Venetian pine wood, not upon Flemish oak;
and for this reason it is considered by Zanetti, as the production of a
native artist. But if the Venetians had really possessed a painter of so
much merit, towards the year 1500, how is it possible that he should be
distinguished only by this solitary specimen of his powers. Even the
very imposing formula he made use of in subscribing his name, contrary
to the usual practice of those times, without mention either of family
or of place, is it not altogether like that of an artist who feels and
displays his own celebrity?[24] To me it does not appear at all
improbable that Ruggieri, on arriving in Italy,[25] sought to employ his
talents upon some subject, in the same way as Ausse,[26] his disciple,
Ugo d'Anversa, and other Flemish painters of that period, whose names
are commemorated along with his by Vasari, in the twenty-first chapter
of his introduction.
Reverting to Antonello, we are told by Borghini and Ridolfi, that Gian
Bellini, having assumed the dress and character of a Venetian gentleman,
for the pretended purpose of having his portrait taken, penetrated by
this disguise into the studio of the Messinese; and watching him while
he painted, discovered the whole secret of the new method, which he
speedily applied. But Zanetti conjectures that Antonello was not very
jealous of his secret, by which means it was quickly diffused among the
different professors of the art. And this is clearly shewn by a picture
of Vivarini, coloured in oil, as early as 1473, no less than by others
from different hands in the years following. Argenville even goes
farther; for he asserts that such was the generosity with which
Antonello taught in Venice, that he drew a crowd of pupils, who assisted
in spreading a knowledge of the discovery through all parts. And among
these we find several foreigners, such as Theodore Harlem, Quintinus
Messis, along with several others mentioned in the preface to the third
volume, p. iii. This we are likewise inclined to admit during the period
of his public instructions in the city.
All that now remains before we reach the times of Titian and Giorgione,
is comprised in that last stage of the art which, in every school, has
opened a path to the golden period which ensued. The masters who were to
distinguish the stage alluded to, in Venice, as in almost all other
parts, are found to retain traces of the ancient stiffness of manner,
and sometimes exhibit, like the naturalists, imperfect forms copied from
the life; as, for instance, in those extravagantly long and spare
figures which we noticed in Pisanello. In Venice such forms were in high
repute with Mansueti, Sebastiani, and other of their contemporaries, nor
were they disliked by the Bellini themselves. And, indeed, where they
selected good proportions, they are apt to arrest the attention by that
simplicity, purity, care, and, as it were timidity of design, which
attempts to avoid every approach to exaggeration. Such artists we might
suppose to have been educated by the more ancient Greek sculptors, in
whose works the exhibition of truth attracts the spectator, like that of
grandeur in others. Their heads, more particularly, are correct and
fine; consisting of portraits taken from the life, both among the
populace, and among persons of superior birth, whether distinguished for
learning, or for their military exploits. And to this practice, familiar
also to artists of the thirteenth century, we are indebted for many
likenesses which were copied at the instance of Giovio, for his museum.
Thence they were again multiplied both by painting and engraving, in
different parts of the world. Often also the artist of those times
inserted his own portrait in his composition; a circumstance so
favourable to Vasari's history; but this species of ostentation was
gradually abandoned as real cultivation in Italy advanced. But then, as
in the heroic and still more uncivilized times, such species of boasting
was not esteemed offensive: and surely, if the literati of the
fourteenth century were in the habit of extolling themselves in their
own works; if the typographers were so fond of exalting themselves and
their editions by superb titles, and more vaunting epigrams, even to a
ridiculous degree; the more modest ambition of sometimes handing down
their own features to posterity, may be excused in our painters.
The colours of these artists are likewise simple and natural, though not
always in union, more especially with the ground, nor sufficiently
broken by the chiaroscuro. But above all, they are most remarkable for
the extreme simplicity of the composition of their pieces. It was very
seldom they inserted histories, it being sufficient for the ambition of
those times to give a representation of our Lady upon a throne,
surrounded with a number of saints, such as the devotion of each was
supposed to require. Nor were those drawn in the manner they had before
been, all erect at equal distances, and in the least studied motions;
but their authors attempted to give them some degree of contrast, so
that while one was drawn gazing upon the Virgin, another appeared
reading a book; if this were in a kneeling attitude, that is seen
standing erect. The national genius, always lively and joyous, even then
sought to develop itself in more brilliant colours than those of any
other school. And, perhaps, in order that the figures, of such glowing
tints, might stand in bolder relief, they kept the colour of the airs
most generally pale and languid. They aimed, indeed, as much as lay in
their power, at enlivening their compositions with the most pleasing
images; freely introducing into their sacred pieces, sportive cherubs,
drawn as if vieing with each other in airy grace and agility; some in
the act of singing, some of playing: and not unfrequently bearing little
baskets of fruit and flowers so exquisitely drawn as to appear moist
with recent dew. In the drapery of their figures they were simple and
natural; the most exempt perhaps from that trite and exact folding, as
well as from that manner of bandaging the bodies so common in Mantegna,
and which infected some other schools.
Nor did they lay small stress upon certain accessaries of their art,
such as the thrones, which they composed in the richest and most
ostentatious manner; and the landscapes, which they drew with an
astonishing degree of truth from nature, besides the architecture
frequently constructed in the forms of porticos or tribunes. It may
sometimes be observed, also, that adapting themselves to the workmanship
and to the design of the altar, they feigned a continuation of it within
the painting, so that by the resemblance of colour and of taste, the eye
is deceived, the illusion produced rendering it doubtful where the
exterior ornament[27] terminates, and where the picture begins. We ought
not, therefore, easily to give credit to certain writers who have
undervalued the merits of such masters, pronouncing their labours
mechanical, as those of mere practical artificers, inasmuch as Serlio is
known to have supplied several of them with architectural designs.[28]
We ought rather to subscribe to the opinion of Daniel Barbaro, whose
extensive learning did not prevent him, in his work entitled _Pratica di
Prospettiva_, from expressing his admiration of them, even from the
commencement, as follows: "In this art they left many fine remnants of
excellent works, in which we behold not only landscapes, mountains,
woods, and edifices, all admirably designed; but even the human form,
and other animals, with lines drawn to the eye, as if to a centre placed
in the most exact perspective. But in what manner, and by what rules
they proceeded, no author of whom I am aware, has left any account to
instruct us."
As this progress of style was more greatly promoted by Gian Bellini than
by any other master, with him I shall commence my account, afterwards
proceeding to treat of his contemporaries, and such of his scholars as
more or less resembled him. Nor, I flatter myself, will it be unpleasing
to the reader, to find mention of the imitation of Giorgione and of
Titian, as it were anticipated, inasmuch as it happens with the
professors of the art of painting, as occasionally with those writers
who have flourished on the confines of two ages; that their style to a
certain degree seems to partake of the colour of both. Thus Giovanni
Bellini himself will afford us, in his numerous productions, which
commence before 1464, and continue down to the year 1516, a sort of
regular gradation of his progress, that may be considered, at the same
time, the progress of his school. Even in his earliest pictures, we
trace the ambition of the artist to ennoble and to enlarge the national
manner. The noble house of their Excellencies Corner, which at the time
of the Queen of Cyprus, gave frequent commissions to his hand, possesses
several specimens of his first style, proceeding gradually to others
appearing always to grow more beautiful. Among these last is a San
Francesco drawn amidst a thick wood; a piece that might well excite the
envy of the best landscape masters themselves. Having reached the period
of 1488, in which he produced an altarpiece still preserved in the
sacristy of the Conventuali, we find he extorts the praises of Vasari,
no less as a good mannerist than a fine designer. With still greater
success he executed other works from the examples afforded by Giorgione.
It was then he conceived his subjects more boldly, gave rotundity to his
forms, and warmth to his colours; he passed more naturally from
contrasted tints, his naked figures became more select, his drapery more
imposing; and if he had succeeded in acquiring a more perfect degree of
softness and delicacy in his contours, he might have been held up as one
of the most finished examples of the modern style. Neither Pietro
Perugino, Ghirlandajo, nor Mantegna attained to it in an equal degree.
The lover of art will find various specimens of him, both in Venice and
elsewhere. His altarpiece, painted for San Zaccaria, in 1505, is well
worthy his attention, as well as that of S. Giobbe, of the date of 1510.
To these we may add a Bacchanal, in the villa Aldobrandini, at Rome,
dated 1514, which, on account of the artist's advanced age, was left
imperfect. I have seen other pictures by his hand, without date, but of
striking merit; more especially a Virgin in the cathedral of Bergamo; a
Baptism of our Lord at Santa Corona, of Vicenza, a Holy Child slumbering
on the lap of the Virgin, between two angels, a production that lies
treasured up in a chest at the Capuchins, in Venice, and which truly
fascinates the eye of the beholder. It displays a striking union of that
beauty, grace, and expression, of which, in this school, he may be said
to have set the example. It would appear that he continued to employ his
talents to an extreme old age, there remaining, in the select gallery of
Santa Giustina, at Padua, one of his Madonnas, painted in 1516.[29] Such
figures, together with those of the Dead Christ, are the most frequent
paintings of his hand that we meet with. Should any one, not content
with the commendations I have bestowed, feel inclined to prefer a
Bellini to a Raffaello, because he was his superior in architectural
design, let him consult the opinion of Boschini, p. 28, of his _Carta da
Navigare_, but let him recollect that the same writer possesses nothing
of the poet beyond the measure of the verse, and the exaggeration of his
praises.
The name of Giovanni ought not to go down unaccompanied by that of his
brother Gentile, who preceded him, alike in the period of his birth and
of his death. Though living apart, in regard to family, they were of
congenial mind and disposition, esteeming one another as friends and
brethren, mutually encouraging and respecting each other, as superior in
merit. But in Giovanni this was modesty, in Gentile only truth. For the
latter had a more confined genius; but by diligence, that sometimes
compensates the neglect of nature, he was enabled to attain an
honourable station among his contemporaries. He was employed by the
republic upon an equal footing with his brother, to adorn the hall of
the great council; and when the Grand Turk sent to Venice in search of
an eminent portrait painter, he was commissioned by the senate to go to
Constantinople, where in the exercise of his profession he added glory
to the Venetian name. Besides his works in painting, he there struck a
fine medallion for Mahomet II., bearing the head of the emperor, with
three crowns on the reverse; a rare work, of which, however, I learn
there is a specimen in possession of his Excellency, Theodore Corer.
However inferior we are to consider him to his brother, and tenacious of
that ancient harshness in many of his works, there are still several of
a more beautiful description, such as his histories of the Holy Cross at
San Giovanni, and the Preaching of S. Mark, at the college of that
saint; a piece, which, placed near that of a Paris Bordone, does no
discredit to its author. He shews himself a faithful copyist, inasmuch
as every thing he remarked in a concourse of people, is faithfully
pourtrayed. The features of the audience, and the peculiar conformations
of the body are as diversified as we see them in nature, including even
instances of deformity, into which through her own general laws, nature
is known to fall; and we are thus presented with caricatures, with bald,
and lean, and pursy, and, what is more remarkable, the auditors of S.
Mark are drawn without regard to times, in the costume of Venetians or
of Turks. Yet from its exact imitation of the truth, its arrangement,
and its animated style, the work does not fail to please and strike the
beholder. I shall even go further; for there are pictures on a smaller
scale, by the same hand, executed with so much taste, that they may be
esteemed not unworthy of the name of his brother. Such is a Presentation
of the infant Jesus at the Temple, in half length, which adorns the
Palazzo Barbarigo, at San Polo, a duplicate of which was painted for
that of the Grimani, with still more delicacy and care. Opposite to this
of Gentile is a fine picture of Gian Bellini, which, however, superior
in the softness of its tints, is considered scarcely equal in point of
beauty and other qualities of the art.
The two Bellini and the last of the Vivarini had a competitor in Vittore
Carpaccio, either a Venetian or a native of Capo d'Istria,[30] and along
with these he was selected to ornament the ducal palace. It was
destroyed by fire in 1576, when that noble collection of ancient
historic pieces perished, though subsequently restored by the most
celebrated artists of later times. Yet there still remains a specimen of
Vittore's style in the Oratory of Santa Ursula, sufficient to entitle
him to rank among the best artists of the age. It consists of eight
histories drawn from the acts of that saint, and of her eleven thousand
companions, which were all about that time very generally admitted to be
true. The production is not wanting in power of conception, developing
numerous and novel combinations, nor in the order of their distribution;
in richness of ideas, both in varying the features and costume, nor in
architectural skill and landscape, serving to adorn them. Still more
remarkable is its expression of nature and simplicity; an expression
which so frequently invited Zanetti himself to a renewed contemplation
of it. He there remarked the various passions of the people, who
appeared to understand every thing passing; and, in their earnest
attention, expressed sentiments in unison with the representation;
whence he concludes his description by saying that Carpaccio felt the
truth in his very heart.
He produced still nobler specimens of his genius in the college of San
Girolamo, which rivalled those of Giovanni Bellini, without, in this
instance, yielding to them. His character, which might frequently be
confounded with that of Gentile, shines most conspicuous, perhaps, in
his altarpieces, where he is original in almost every composition. The
most celebrated in Venice is one of the Purification at San Giobbe, in
which, however, the S. Vecchio Simeone is represented in a pontifical
dress, between two servants arrayed like cardinals. If we except this
error, in point of costume, and add a little more warmth of colours to
the flesh, more delicacy of contour, the piece would not discredit the
first artist of any times. Owing to the fault of his early education,
however, these qualities he never attained. This, also, happened to
Lazzaro Sebastiani, his disciple and follower; to Giovanni Mansueti, to
Marco, and to Pietro Veglia, as well as to Francesco Rizzo, of San
Croce, a territory in the district of Bergamo;[31] artists who, however
nearly they touched upon the golden period, did not succeed in freeing
themselves from the influence of the old and uniform taste, and for this
reason are often confounded with each other. I do not here treat of the
paintings left by them at Venice, as they have so frequently been
described elsewhere. It will be enough to inform the reader that in
these, also, we discover several noble traces of the style of Gentile
and Carpaccio, more especially in the architecture, and that their
colouring, which, in this school, is considered cold and languid, would
be termed, in several of the others, both soft and animated enough for
that period. The one who, if I mistake not, approaches nearer to the
modern, and in some degree towards the style of Giorgione, is Benedetto
Diana, as well in his altarpiece of Santa Lucia, at the SS. Apostoli, as
in the Limosina de' Confratelli di San Giovanni, painted at their
college in competition with the Bellini.
We next come to Marco Basaiti, sprung from a Greek family in the Friuli,
and a rival also of Giovanni; but more successful than Carpaccio. The
church of San Giobbe, here mentioned for the third time, possesses his
picture of Christ praying in the Garden, painted in 1510. It is now a
little defaced, but has been highly extolled by Ridolfi and others, who
beheld it in a more perfect condition. Above all his productions,
however, the Vocation of San Pietro to the Apostleship, in the church of
the Certosa, is the most celebrated; a piece, of which there is seen a
duplicate in the imperial gallery at Vienna. It is certainly one of the
most beautiful pictures of that age; and most generally there is no kind
of merit in Gian Bellini, in which Basaiti does not either equal, or
very closely approach him. Indeed he appears to exhibit even a freer
genius, a more happy composition, and a more skilful art in uniting the
grounds of his pictures with the figures. These are beautiful, and for
the most part incline to the free style; their look is full of fire; the
tints of the fleshy parts of a rosy glow; the middle tints inclining
sometimes to paleness, but not without grace. Though not a native, he
resided a long period at Venice, which contains a good number of his
works, a few of which are in the ancient taste, but the most part
bordering upon the modern. His native place of Friuli possesses no other
specimen besides a Christ taken from the Cross, in the monastery of
Sesto, consisting of large figures, with a fine group in the background
of the picture, and with a landscape full of nature. In several parts it
is defaced by age; but a true connoisseur will still, perhaps, prefer it
to the others, for being free from the retouches of modern art.
Among the pupils of Gian Bellini, who were very numerous, are some who
ought to be referred to another epoch, like Giorgione, and to different
schools, like Rondinello of Ravenna; several, however, take their place
here, who, in the opinion of their national contemporaries, did not
fully attain to the possession of the new style. The family of the heads
of the school, produced also a Bellin Bellini, who being educated in
that academy, very happily imitated its manner. He painted Madonnas for
private individuals, which, their author being little known, are for the
most part attributed to Gentile, or to Giovanni. The artist who is
mentioned by Vasari as the pupil of Giovanni, named Girolamo Mocetto,
was one of the earliest and least polished among his disciples. He did
not reach the sixteenth century; and left behind him some engravings
upon copper, now become extremely rare; besides small pictures, one of
which, subscribed with the author's name, in 1484, is in the possession
of the before mentioned house of Corer. The Veronese, who are in
possession of his portrait, amongst those of the painters of their town,
in the Scuola del Nudo, can also boast one of his altarpieces, bearing
the name and date of 1493, in their church of S. Nazario e Celso. Such
information I obtained from Signor Saverio dalla Rosa, a Veronese
painter of merit. Another less distinguished, and somewhat stiff scholar
or imitator of Bellini, has affixed his name in several places, at the
foot of sacred figures, as follows: "_Marcus Martialis Venetus_;" and in
a _Purificazione_, existing in the Conservatory of the Penitents, we
meet with the year 1488. And from a _Supper of Emmaus_, belonging to the
family of the Contarini, with the painter's name, we learn that in the
year 1506 he was still alive.
An artist of a better taste appeared in Vincenzio Catena, a wealthy
citizen, who obtained a good deal of celebrity by his portraits and
pictures for private rooms. His masterpiece consists of a Holy family,
in the style of Giorgione, ornamenting the noble Pesaro gallery; and if
he had produced nothing more than this, he would no longer be included
in the present epoch; but his other pieces, exhibiting more traces of
the old style, which remain at San Maurizio, at San Simeone Grande, at
the Carita, and elsewhere, authorise our enumeration of them here. They
are beautiful; but not sufficiently in the modern taste. His reputation,
however, while living, was so great, that in a letter written by Marc
Antonio Michiel from Rome, to Antonio di Marsilio in Venice, dated 11th
of April, 1520, when Raffaello was just deceased and Buonarotti infirm,
it is recommended to Catena to be upon his guard, "since danger seems to
be impending over all very excellent painters."[32] One Giannetto
Cordegliaghi enjoyed also a high reputation, if he be rightly named by
Vasari, who commends him for his soft and delicate manner, superior to
many of his contemporaries; adding, that he had produced an infinite
number of pictures for private persons. In Venice he is termed, I
suppose for the sake of brevity, Cordella; and to him is attributed the
beautiful portrait of the Cardinal Bessarione in the college of La
Carita, with a few other specimens, the rest having dropt into oblivion.
Probably his real name was double, _Cordella Aghi_. It is certain that
Zanetti read, upon a beautiful Madonna, belonging to the learned Zeno,
_Andreas Cordelle Agi, F._ This last is of the same family as Giannetto;
or perhaps also in place of Giannetto, Vasari ought to have written
Andrea; as instead of Jacopo he ought to have said Francesco Squarcione.
Nor can it be denied, that if we except the artists of Verona and
Friuli, this historian was deficient in information, as he himself
declares, relating to the Venetian School. It is sufficient to turn to
his proemium of the life of Carpaccio, in order to observe how many
times, in a very few lines, he is guilty of making mistakes. Of Lazzaro
Sebastiani, he made two painters; two others out of Marco Basaiti,
dividing him into Marco Basarini and Marco Bassiti, and assigning to
each his several works. Moreover, he wrote Vittore Scarpaccia, Vittor
Bellini, Giambatista da Cornigliano, and confounded the labours of all
the three together. Elsewhere we meet with Mansuchi for Mansueti;
Guerriero and Guarriero, instead of Guariento; Foppa is made into Zoppa,
Giolfino into Ursino, Morazone into Mazzone, Bozzato into Bazzacco,
Zuccati into Zuccheri and Zuccherini; and thus he continued to blunder
through other Lombard and Venetian names, insomuch as almost to vie with
Harms, with Cochin, and with similar inaccurate foreigners.
The following names were slightly esteemed or slightly known by Vasari,
and therefore omitted in his history: Piermaria Pennacchi of Trevisi,
and Pier Francesco Bissolo, a Venetian. Of the former there remain two
entablatures, painted for churches, more excellent in point of colouring
than design. One is in Venice, the other at Murano. Of these artists,
Pier Francesco painted on the least extensive scale, but was more
finished and beautiful. His altarpieces in Murano, and in the cathedral
of Trevigi, may be put in competition with those of the elder Palma; and
one in possession of the family of Renier, representing The Meeting of
Simeon, still nearer approaches to the fulness and softness of the
moderns.
Girolamo di San Croce was still more deserving of commemoration than
these. Yet Vasari omitted him; Boschini is silent on the subject; and
Ridolfi has found in him more to blame than to praise, asserting that he
had never freed himself from the ancient style, though flourishing at a
period when the less celebrated geniuses attempted to modernise their
taste. Happily, however, for this distinguished man, not a few of his
best labours have been preserved, of which Zanetti has pronounced his
opinion that, "he approaches nearer to the manner of Giorgione and
Titian, than any of the others." And such commendation is justified by
his altarpiece of S. Parisio, so highly mentioned in the Guide of
Treviso, and which is to be seen at the church of that saint. In Venice
itself there are some of his pictures which display uncommon merit, such
as the _Supper of our Saviour_, with the name of Santa Croce, which is
in S. Martino; and a _Salvatore_, at S. Francesco della Vigna, which
though in a precise taste, shows extreme richness of colouring. There
also appears, at the same place, his picture of the Martyrdom of S.
Lorenzo; a repetition of which is found in the noble house of Collalto,
nearly resembling the original, and in other places. It abounds in
figures of about a palm's length, imitated, in some part, from the
celebrated composition of Bandinelli, engraved by Marc Antonio, whose
impressions to Girolamo proved a rich mine of art, affording originals
for those small but valuable paintings, meant to adorn private rooms. In
none of them, however, was he a mere copyist; he varied the figures, and
more especially the landscapes, in which he was a very skilful hand. In
this manner he produced many of those Bacchanals, which are to be met
with in different collections. In that of the Casa Albani, at Bergamo,
is a S. Gio. Elemosinario (almsgiver) in grand architecture, seen among
a crowd of paupers; and in the collection of Count Carrara, also at
Bergamo, there is a Saviour taken from the Cross, highly valued for the
portrait of the artist, which points to a holy cross, the symbol of his
name. Not any of these productions are embued with traces of the ancient
style. They display a grace of composition, study of foreshortening, and
of the naked parts, a harmony of colours, forming a mixture of different
schools, in which the Roman predominates, and least of all the Venetian.
Further we would refer the reader to what has already been stated at
page 57.
To these Venetian professors, or at least, established in Venice, it
will be proper to add several educated by Giovanni, in the provinces,
and in this way resume the thread of our pictoric history of the state.
There was no place in the whole dominion which did not boast either of
his disciples or imitators. We shall proceed to treat severally of
these, beginning with the name of Conegliano, which he derived from a
city in the Marca Trevigiana, his native place, whose mountainous views
he has introduced into his paintings, as if to serve for his device.
The artist's name, however, is Giambatista Cima, and his style most
resembles the better part of that of Gian Bellini. The professors indeed
may often be confounded together, to such a degree do we find Conegliano
diligent, graceful, lively in his motions and his colouring, although
less smooth than Bellini. Perhaps one of his best pieces that I have
seen, is in the cathedral at Parma, though it is omitted in the
catalogue of his works. That at the church of Santa Maria dell' Orto,
one of the most rich in paintings, in all Venice, possesses less
softness; but in point of architecture, in the air of its heads, and in
the distribution of its colours, there is something so extremely
attractive, that we are never weary of contemplating it. The different
collections in Italy, no less than those in other parts, are many of
them in possession, or said to be in possession, of specimens from this
artist's hand; and if we add to these his altarpieces, sufficiently
numerous, they will be found to amount to a very considerable class. We
are informed, however, by Padre Federici, that one of Cima's sons, of
the name of Carlo, imitated so closely the style of his father, that
there are pictures which ought often to be attributed to the former
instead of to the latter.
This artist resided but a short time in his own province; and the
altarpiece placed by him in the cathedral of his native place, in 1493,
is considered a youthful performance. He continued to exercise his art
until the year 1517, according to Ridolfi, and died in the maturity of
his powers. The date of 1542, which we find at San Francesco di Rovigo
placed upon an altarpiece of Conegliano, (if it be not a copy,) marks
only the era of the erecting of the altar, which was painted afterwards.
He is said by Boschini to have been the tutor of Vittor Belliniano, by
Vasari called Bellini; the same who represented in the college of St.
Mark's, the martyrdom of the saint. The best portion of this history is
the architecture it displays.
The artists, educated in the school of Giovanni, who flourished at
Friuli, were two natives of Udine: Giovanni di M. Martino, as he is
entitled in some family documents, and Gio. Martini, by Vasari; and
Martino d'Udine, who in the _Storia Pittorica_, is called Pellegrino di
S. Daniello. The style of the former was harsh and crude, though not
destitute of grace in the countenances and in the colouring. The name of
Pellegrino was bestowed upon the latter by Bellini, in honour of his
rare genius, while the name of the country was attached to him from his
long residence in S. Daniello, a territory not far from Udine. This city
is, nevertheless, the place where he appears to most advantage, in
competition with Giovanni; as the same emulation they had felt while
fellow pupils, continued, as sometimes happens, when they became
masters. In that city appear the labours of each, and more particularly
in the two chapels contiguous to the dome, where the first of them was
employed in the year 1501, the second in 1502. Giovanni, in his
altarpiece of St. Mark, there produced the richest specimen which
appeared from his hand; and Pellegrino left that of his St. Joseph,
preferred by Vasari, in some degree, to the work of Martini. I have seen
the last mentioned picture in oil, faded indeed in colour, and in other
respects defaced; yet still worthy of admiration for its architecture,
which gives a graceful fulness to the whole canvass, and a striking
relief to the three figures, consisting of S. Joseph with the holy child
in his arms, and S. John the Baptist, each of which displays the finest
contours and the best forms. Other specimens of the same pencil are to
be seen in Udine, among which are the SS. Agostino and Girolamo, in the
public council hall, a picture remarkable also for its power of
colouring.
As this artist advanced in age, he improved in the softness of his
tints, as well as in every other quality. The altarpiece at Santa Maria
de' Battuti, which is in Cividale, and represents the Virgin seated
between the four virgins of Aquileja, besides the Saints Batista and
Donato, and a cherub, partakes of Giorgione; it is enumerated among the
rarest paintings of Friuli, and was executed in the year 1529. Yet above
any of his productions, are esteemed those various histories of the life
of our Saviour, painted in fresco at S. Daniele, in the church of S.
Antonio, together with the titular saint, and several other portraits of
the brethren of that chapel, so richly adorned by his hand, all
breathing and glowing proofs of his art. By his means, also, one of the
pictoric schools of Friuli rose into high repute, and will be elsewhere
described.
At Rovigo, in possession of the noble family of Casalini, is a picture
of the Circumcision of our Saviour, bearing this memorandum: _Opus Marci
Belli discipuli Johannis Bellini_. He is a good disciple of the school,
and would appear to be a different artist from that Marco, son of Gio.
Tedesco, who was employed in 1463 at Rovigo.
In the adjacent city of Padua, the style of the Bellini was less
followed, a very natural circumstance in a place where Squarcione, the
avowed rival of Giovanni, held supreme sway. Still there are several
pictures belonging to this age remaining there, which partake of the
Venetian style; and Vasari, in his life of Carpaccio, records, that in
fact Niccolo Moreto executed many works in Padua,[33] besides many other
artists connected with the Bellini. A picture of Christ risen from the
dead, merits particular mention; it adorns the episcopal palace at
Padua, along with the portraits of all the Paduan bishops, and the busts
of the apostles, including several of their acts, executed with much
elegance in chiaroscuro. The work is dated 1495, in which the painter
subscribes his name _Jacobus Montagnana_; not Montagna, as it is written
in Vasari and Ridolfi.
There remains of his a very extensive altarpiece, at the Santo, the
style inclining as much as in any others, to the modern; and to whatever
degree it may partake of the Venetian in taste of colours, in its design
it partakes of a more precise and spare expression upon the principle of
the Paduan School. To this, also, he very manifestly conformed himself,
in that celebrated picture left in Belluno, at the hall of council, in
which he represented[34] Roman histories. It is an immense production,
and at the first view would incline us to attribute it to the pencil of
Mantegna, such is the design, the drapery, and the composition of the
figures; while even several of them are known to have been accurately
copied, with the same forms and motions, from those Mantegna had already
introduced into his grand chapel at the Eremitani. Here we have a clear
proof that both received the same education, or at least, that
Montagnana had profited much by the Paduan School. I say only _much_,
for in point of costume he does not shew any traces of the erudite
instructions of Squarcione; but commits faults resembling those of the
Bellini, to whom by popular opinion, recorded by the very diligent
author of the new Guide of Padua, he has been given as a pupil.
I have before treated of Squarcione, and of his method, reserving for a
fitter place the consideration of his disciples, more especially Andrea
Mantegna. He will, however, be included in the present list as a
scholar; although, as a master of the school of Lombardy, we are bound
to speak of him with more commendation, in another chapter. But even the
first essays of great characters are valuable; and Vasari does not
scruple to commend Andrea's first altarpiece as a work worthy of his old
age. It was placed in Santa Sofia, where the artist has signed himself
_Andreas Mantinea Patavinus annos VII. et X. natus sua manu pinxit,
1448_. Squarcione was so much delighted with his early genius, that he
adopted him for his son. But he afterwards regretted his own generosity,
when the young artist took to wife the daughter of his rival, Jacopo
Bellini; so that he then began to blame him, yet at the same time to
instruct him better. Andrea having been educated in an academy which
adopted the study of marbles, indulged great admiration of several Greek
bassi relievi, in the ancient style, such as is that of the Primarii
Dei, in an altar of the capitol. He was therefore extremely bent upon
acquiring the chasteness of the contours, the beauty of the ideas and of
the bodies; but not content with adopting that straitness of the
garment, those parallel folds, and that study of parts which so easily
degenerates into stiffness, he neglected that portion of his art which
animates the otherwise uninformed images--expression. In this respect he
greatly failed in his picture of the Martyrdom of S. Jacopo, placed in
the church of the Eremitani, and from which Squarcione took occasion to
reprehend him severely. These complaints led him to adopt a better
method, and in his representation of the history of S. Cristoforo,
placed opposite his S. Jacopo, he threw more expression into his
figures; and in particular, his production about the same period of San
Marco, in the act of writing the gospel, painted for Santa Giustina,
displays in the features the absorbed mind of the philosopher and the
enthusiasm of a saint. If Squarcione thus contributed by his reproaches
to render this artist great, the Bellini, perhaps, co-operated with him
by friendship and relationship, in producing the same result. He resided
little in Venice, but during that time he did not fail to avail himself
of the best portion of that school; and we thus perceive in some of his
pictures, landscapes and gardens quite in the Venetian character,
besides a knowledge of colours not inferior to the best Venetian artists
of the age. I am uncertain whether he or some other communicated to the
Bellini that species of perspective so much commended by Barbaro; but I
know that Lomazzo, in his "Tempio della Pittura," page 53, has put on
record _that Mantegna was the first who gave us true notions relating to
this art_: and I know that the most distinguished characters of those
times were equally eager, either to become scholars in such points as
they were themselves deficient in, or masters in such as were wanting in
others.
The style of Mantegna being known, it will not be difficult to divine
that of his fellow pupils, educated in the same maxims, and instructed
by his examples. The chapel before mentioned exhibits specimens of
three, the first of whom, Niccolo Pizzolo is pointed out by Vasari. A
picture of the Assumption of the Virgin in an altarpiece, with other
figures on the wall, are by his hand. There is also a fresco in one of
the facades with the motto _Opus Nicoletti_: and in both places he not
only strongly resembles, but approaches near the composition of
Mantegna. Two other artists also painted there certain histories of S.
Cristoforo, under one of which is inserted _Opus Boni_; under the other,
_Opus Ansuini_, an artist of Forli. Both of these might elsewhere have
been admired; but there they appear only as scholars by the side of
their master. An artist more nearly approaching Mantegna, and who, in
the chief part of his figures might be mistaken for him, is Bernardo
Parentino, who painted for a cloister of Santa Giustina, ten acts in the
life of San Benedetto, and little histories in chiaroscuro, representing
upon each the portrait of a Pontiff of the name of Benedict. I have seen
no painting adapted to a religious cloister so well conceived in every
part; and it is known that it was superintended by a distinguished
scholar of that learned order, the Abate Gaspero da Pavia. Attached to
it is the name of Parentino and the dates of 1489 and 1494. The work was
continued by a Girolamo da Padua, or Girolamo dal Santo, celebrated for
his miniatures, as it is recorded by Vasari and Ridolfi. Here, however,
he exhibits himself a poor artist, in point of design, and still more so
in expression, though praiseworthy in many accessaries of his art, more
particularly in his study of ancient costume, an acquisition as general
in this, as rare in the Venetian School. Those histories, indeed, are
frequently found ornamented with ancient bassi relievi, with sarcophagi,
and with inscriptions copied, for the most part, from Paduan marbles; a
practice followed, also, by Mantegna, but with more moderation, in the
chapel of the Eremitani.
The rest of his contemporaries, in Padua, were Lorenzo da Lendinara,
esteemed an excellent artist, but of whom no traces remain; Marco Zoppo,
of Bologna, who more nearly resembled, perhaps, his master than his
fellow pupil, but of honourable account, as the head of the Bolognese
School; and Dario da Trevigi, whose productions are to be seen in S.
Bernardino, at Bassano, opposite to those of Mantegna, as if to exhibit
their inferiority. Girolamo, or rather Gregorio[35] Schiavone, whose
style is between that of Mantegna and the Bellini, is a pleasing artist,
whose pictures are frequently to be met with, ornamented with
architectural views, with fruits, and above all with joyous little
cherubs. One of the most delightful I have seen, was in Fossombrone, in
possession of a private individual, and it bears inscribed, _Opus
Sclavonii Dalmatici Squarzoni S. (Scholaris)_. Hieronymus Tarvisio is
another, but doubtful pupil of Squarcione, whose name I found subscribed
in some pictures at Trevigi, an artist poor in colours, but not
unacquainted with design. We find mention in Sansovino, an author not
always to be relied upon in his account of Venetian paintings, of Lauro
Padovano, who produced several histories of S. Giovanni for the Carita
in Venice; but I so far agree with the above author, in pronouncing
these altogether in the style of Mantegna. Nearly approaching also to
the composition of this school, is the style of Maestro Angelo, who
painted in the ancient refectory of Santa Giustina, a Crucifixion of the
Saviour, with figures, both in proportions and in spirit truly great. I
have nothing to add to the name of Mattio dal Pozzo, enumerated in this
class by Scardeone, (p. 371) inasmuch as there are none of his works now
surviving.
At the period, when the School of Padua was opposed to the Venetian, the
other cities of the state, as far as we can learn, had adopted a taste
rather for the ornamental style of the latter, than the more erudite
maxims of the former; it might, perhaps, be added, on account of its
greater facility; because the beauty of nature is everywhere more
obvious than the monuments of antiquity. Bassano then boasted a
Francesco da Ponte, Vicenza the two Montagna and Bonconsigli, all of
whom, though born in the immediate vicinity of Padua, became disciples
of the Bellini. Da Ponte, a native of Vicenza, was pretty well embued
with a taste for polite literature and philosophy, extremely desirable
in the head of a school, such as he became in the instruction of Jacopo,
and through him of the Bassanese; a school highly distinguished during,
and even beyond the sixteenth century. The style of his altarpieces,
when compared with each other, acquaints us with the earliest and latest
specimens of his pencil. He is diligent, but dry in that of his S.
Bartolommeo, in the cathedral at Bassano; more soft in another at the
church of S. Giovanni, but far better in one of the Pentecost, which he
painted for the village of Oliero, almost in the style of the moderns,
displaying studied composition, and a colouring various, beautiful, and
harmonious; and what is still more, a fine expression of the passions,
best adapted to the mystery. We are led to believe, from the account of
Lomazzo, that he likewise painted, at another period, in Lombardy;
observing that a certain Francesco, of Vicenza, produced a work at the
_Grazie_ of Milan, well executed in point of design, but not so pleasing
in the effect of its lights and shades.
The two Montagna flourished about the period 1500, in Vicenza, and were
employed together, however unequal in genius, being equally followers of
the Bellini, at least if we are to give credit to Ridolfi, who must have
seen many of their productions, now no longer in existence. In those
which I have seen, there appeared strong traces of the style of
Mantegna. Benedetto is not mentioned by Vasari, who is apt to omit the
names of all artists whom he accounted of inferior worth. He mentions
Bartolommeo, as a pupil of Mantegna,[36] and he would certainly have
done him more justice had he seen the works he produced in his native
place, which, so far from having done, he asserts that the artist
constantly resided in Venice. Vicenza boasts many of his pieces, which
display the gradual progress of his style. If we wish to estimate the
extent of his powers, we ought to consult his altarpiece at S. Michele,
and another at S. Rocco, to which may be added a third, in that of the
Seminary at Padua. In none of these are we able to discover any
composition beyond what was in most general use at that period, already
so frequently mentioned by us; and they retain more of the practice of
gilding, which, in other places, was then becoming obsolete. In fine,
this artist will be found to rank equal with the chief part of his
contemporaries; exact in design, skilful in the naked parts, while his
colours are fresh and warm. His cherubs are peculiarly graceful and
pleasing, and in his altarpiece, at S. Michele, he has introduced an
architecture which recedes from, and deceives the eye with a power of
illusion, sufficient of itself to have rendered him conspicuous. Of
Giovanni Speranza, there remain a few pieces which are much esteemed,
though not remarkable for strength of colouring. But we can meet with no
public specimens of Veruzio, and most probably his name is a mere
equivoque of Vasari.[37] Giovanni Bonconsigli, called Marescalco, or the
steward, was esteemed beyond any other of the artists of Vicenza, who
flourished at this period, and he certainly approaches nearest to the
modern style, and that of the Bellini. The practice, however, of
ornamenting friezes with tritons and similar figures, taken from the
antique, he most likely derived from the adjacent cities of Padua or
Verona, one of which then professed the study of antiquity, the other
that of monuments. Neither Vasari nor Ridolfi gives any account of his
productions, except such as he painted in Venice, at this time either
wholly perished or defaced. Those which he executed in Vicenza are still
in good condition, nor ought a stranger of good taste to leave the place
without visiting the chapel de' Turchini, to admire his Madonna in the
style of Raffaello, seated upon a throne, between four saints, among
which the figure of S. Sebastian is a masterpiece of ideal beauty.
Indeed an able professor of the city considered it one of the finest
specimens of the art the place could boast, though in possession of many
of the first merit. In common with Montagna, Figolino, and Speranza,
Bonconsigli abounds in perspective views, and discovers a natural genius
for architecture; like them he appears to give promise of the approach
of a divine Palladio, the glory of his country and of his art; along
with the Scamozzi, and many other citizens, who have rendered Vicenza at
once the boast and wonder, as well as the school of architects. There
are two altarpieces of his hand remaining in Montagnana. This artist
must not be confounded with Pietro Marescalco, surnamed lo Spada, (the
sword,) whom the MS. history of Feltre mentions as a native of this
city, and complains of Vasari's silence upon it. One of his altarpieces
is to be seen at the Nunnery of the Angeli, at Feltre, where Signor Cav.
de Lazara informs me that he read the name of _Petrus Marescalcus P_.
Among other figures is a Madonna, between two angels, upon a large
scale, and in good design, sufficient to entitle Pietro to an honourable
rank in the history of art. If we compare him with Giovanni, he will be
found less vivid in point of colouring, and, apparently, of a somewhat
later age.
In the order of our narrative, we ought now to pass on to Verona, where
Liberale, a disciple of Vincenzio di Stefano, at that time held sway. He
had also been a scholar or rather imitator of Jacopo Bellini, to whose
style, says Vasari, he invariably adhered. Moreover, in his picture of
the Epiphany, to be seen in the cathedral, there is a choir of angels
with a graceful folding of drapery, and a taste so peculiarly that of
Mantegna, that I was easily led to believe him an artist belonging to
that class. Certain it is that the vicinity of Mantua might also have
facilitated his imitation of Mantegna, traces of which are visible in
some other of his works, as well as in those of the more and less known
Veronese artists of the time. He did not attain the excellence of
Giovanni Bellini, nor did he give the same grandeur to his proportions,
and the same enlargement of the ancient style, although he continued to
flourish until the year 1535. The colour of his tints is strong; his
expression studied and graceful; a very general merit in the painters of
Verona; and his care is exquisite, especially in his diminutive figures,
an art in which he became extremely expert, owing to his habit of
illustrating books in miniature, which are still to be seen in Verona
and in Siena.
He had a competitor, at his native place, in Domenico Morone, or rather
the latter, educated also by a disciple of Stefano, is to be held second
to him. This artist was succeeded in the course of time, by his son,
Francesco Morone, superior to his father, and by Girolamo da' Libri.
These two, bound by the strictest habits of friendship from their youth,
were frequently employed in the same labours together, and may be said
to have adopted the same maxims. The first has been commended by Vasari,
for the grace, the design, the harmony, and the warm and beautiful
colouring he contrived to bestow upon his pictures, in a degree inferior
to none. From the same source we learn that the year of his decease is
supposed to have been 1529. But Girolamo da' Libri was his superior,
both in point of taste and general celebrity. The son of a miniature
painter of choral books and of anthems, who had hence acquired the name
of Francesco da' Libri, from his father he received both a knowledge of
the art and his surname, both of which he also transmitted to his son,
Francesco, as we again learn from Vasari.
It is not, however, within my province to enter into a consideration of
their books; but in regard to the altarpieces of Girolamo, I cannot
remain silent. That of S. Lionardo, near Verona, I have never seen; a
picture in which the artist having drawn a laurel, the birds are said to
have frequently entered at the church windows, fluttering around as if
wishing to repose in its branches. Another which I beheld at S. Giorgio,
with the date 1529, scarcely retains a trace of the ancient character.
It represents the Virgin between two holy bishops, portraits select and
full of meaning; together with three exquisitely graceful figures of
cherubs, both in face and gesture. In this little picture may be traced,
to a certain degree, the character of a miniaturist who paints, or a
painter drawing miniature; while the charms of the several professions
are seen there exhibited in one point of view. The church, indeed, is a
rich gallery, containing numerous masterpieces of the art; among which
the S. Giorgio of Paolo (Veronese) too far transcends the rest; but the
painting of Girolamo shines almost like a precious jewel, surprising the
spectator by an indescribable union of what is graceful, bright, and
lucid, which it presents to the eye. He survived many years after the
production of this piece, highly esteemed, and in particular for his
miniatures, in which he was accounted the first artist in Italy; and as
if to crown his reputation, he became the instructor, in such art, of
Don Giulio Clovio, a sort of Roscius, if we may so say, of miniature
painting.
However flourishing in valuable masters we may consider the city of
Venice during this era, the fame of Mantegna, with the vicinity of
Mantua, where he taught, attracted thither two artists from Verona, whom
I reserve for that school, of which they were faithful followers. These
were Monsignori, and Gio. Francesco Carotto, formerly a pupil of
Liberale. His brother Giovanni, a noble architect, and designer of
ancient edifices, was but a feeble imitator of his style. He richly
deserves a place in history as the instructor of Paolo, an artist
excellent in many branches of painting, and in architecture almost
divine. It is supposed that Paolo must have acquired this degree of
excellence by studying at first under Carotto, and afterwards perfecting
himself, as we shall shew, by means of Badile. To such as are most known
we might here add names less celebrated, which the Marchese Maffei,
however, has already inserted in his history; as, for instance, a Matteo
Pasti, commended by us in the first volume; but I have, perhaps, already
treated sufficiently of the merits of the old Veronese artists.
About this period there flourished two distinguished artists in Brescia,
who were present at the terrific saccage of that opulent city, in the
year 1512, by Gaston de Foix. One of these is Fioravante Ferramola, who
was honoured and remunerated upon that occasion by the French victor for
his striking merit, and became sufficiently conspicuous in various
churches of the country. His painting of S. Girolamo is seen at Le
Grazie, extremely well conceived, with fine landscape, and in a taste so
like that of Muziano, that we might almost suppose it prognosticated his
appearance. And it might be said that he afforded the latter a
prototype, if he does not aspire to the name of his master. The other is
Paolo Zoppo, who depicted the above desolation of the city in miniature,
upon a large crystal bason; a work of immense labour, intended to be
presented to the doge Gritti: but in transporting it to Venice, the
crystal was unfortunately broken, and the unhappy artist died of
disappointment and despair. The specimens of his style remaining at
Brescia, among which is one of Christ going up to Mount Calvary, at S.
Pietro in Oliveto--a piece falsely attributed by others to Foppa--serve
to shew that he approached near to the modern manner, and was not
unacquainted with the Bellini.
Finally, Bergamo boasted in Andrea Previtali one of the most excellent
disciples of Gian Bellini. He appears, indeed, less animated than his
master, and less correct in the extremities of his figures; neither have
I discovered any of his compositions which are free from the ancient
taste, whether in the grouping of his forms, or in the minute
ornamenting of the accessaries of his art. Nevertheless, in a few
pictures produced, perhaps, later in life, such as his S. Giovanni
Batista, at S. Spirito; his S. Benedetto, in the dome of Bergamo, and
several more in the Carrara Gallery, he very nearly attained to the
modern manner; and was indisputably one of the most distinguished
artists, in point of colours and perspective, belonging to the school of
the Bellini. His Madonnas are held in the highest esteem; in whose
features he appears less a disciple of Gian Bellini, than of Raffaello,
and of Vinci. Two of them at Milan I have seen, both bearing his name:
one is in possession of the Cavalier Melzi; the other in that of Monsig.
Arciprete Rosales, painted in 1522; and both are surrounded with figures
of other saints, portraits executed with discrimination and truth. There
is also a picture of Our Lord announced by the Angel, at Ceneda, a work
so uncommonly beautiful in regard to the two heads, that Titian, in
passing occasionally through the place, is said, according to Ridolfi,
to have repeatedly contemplated it with rapture; charmed by the spirit
of devotion it expressed. Upon the same boundaries, between the ancient
and modern taste, we find various other painters, natives of the valleys
of Bergamo, a fruitful source both of wealth and intellect to the city.
Such is Antonio Boselli,[38] from the Valle Brembana, of whom there has
recently been discovered a fine altarpiece at the Santo of Padua;
besides two other artists of the same vale, who approach even nearer to
the softness, if not to the elegance of Previtali. These are Gian
Giacomo, and Agostino Gavasii di Pascante. We may add to these Jacopo
degli Scipioni, of Averara, and Caversegno, of Bergamo, besides others
handed down to us by Tassi. These, having flourished at a period so
distinguished for the art of colouring, may be compared to certain
writers of the fourteenth century, who throw little light upon learning;
but who, observes Salvini, in respect to language, appear to me as if
every separate page were embued with gold.
I have already pointed out to the reader, the best masters of the
Venetian School, contemporary with, and followers of Gian Bellini; a
number which, though we subtract from it several names of inferior note,
will leave a larger proportion than is generally supposed. The state,
indeed, is full of specimens founded upon his models, the authors of
which remain doubtful; yet it is certain they composed in Bellini's
style, while their designs partake more or less both of the modern and
ancient taste.[39] Undoubtedly, no other school affords a proof of so
great a number of disciples from one master, and following so closely in
his footsteps. Granting this, I cannot easily give credit to the
numerous specimens of Madonnas attributed to his single hand, besides
other pictures in different collections. A cautious judge will not be
apt to pronounce any work his, which displays much of ideal beauty;
Bellini having, for the most part, repeated in his feminine figures an
expression of countenance, partaking in some degree of an apish
character. Nor will he be easily led to ascribe to him pictures which
display a minute care and finish, approaching to the miniature style,
inasmuch as he embodied and coloured his conceptions with a free and
fearless hand. In short, a certain vigour of colour, warm and lively; a
certain reddish tinge of the drapery, approaching a rosy hue; a certain
brightness of varnish, are not the usual characteristics of his hand,
however much his style of design may be mixed up with them; and such
pieces may reasonably be presumed the production of those artists of the
state bordering nearest upon Lombardy, whence, likewise, a few of the
Venetian state derived the mechanical part of their colouring.
Within the limits proposed to myself, I may here annex to my
consideration of the painters in water colours and in oil, other less
distinguished branches of the art. Among these is that species of inlaid
work with wood of different colours, which was intended more
particularly for the ornament of choirs where the divine service was
chaunted. I can trace nothing of its inventors, whether of German or
other origin;[40] though it is said to have taken its rise in an
imitation of mosaic work, and of works in stone. No other coloured woods
besides black and white were at first in use; nor any other objects
beyond large edifices, temples, colonnades, and in short ornaments with
architectural views, attempted to be represented. Brunelleschi at
Florence gave instructions in perspective to architects, that edifices
might be drawn according to good rules; and Massaccio in painting,
greatly availed himself of his precepts, as well as Benedetto da Majano
in his inlaid works. There remain at Florence, as well as other places
in Italy, several ancient choirs very highly prized in that age, but
afterwards despised, when the art of staining wood with boiled water
colours and penetrative oils, came into use. Thus, after the imitation
of buildings, easily drawn from the number of their right lines, that of
figures began to be practised in an able manner, though it had formerly
been tried with less success. The chief merit of such improvement, or
rather perfection of the art, was due to the Venetian School. Lorenzo
Canozio, from Lendinara, a fellow student of Mantegna, who died about
1477, inlaid the entire choir of the church of S. Antonio, even, as it
would appear, with figures. The whole, however, having been consumed by
fire, there is nothing remaining but the epitaph of the artificer, in
which he is highly applauded for his labours. There likewise exist other
works of the same kind, in the armadj, chests, or presses, of the
sacristy, and, as it is supposed, also in some of the confessionals.
Besides Lorenzo, his brother Cristofano, and his son-in-law Pierantonio,
who assisted him in these labours, are equally applauded by Matteo
Siculo, as worthy of vieing with Phidias and Apelles themselves.
Tiraboschi likewise enumerates the two brothers among the artists of
Modena, whose fellow citizens they were.
But the fame of these soon expired. For Giovanni da Verona, a layman of
Oliveto, not long after, surpassed them in the same art. He practised it
in various cities of Italy, and at Rome itself, in the service of Pope
Julius II; but still more successfully in the sacristy of his own order,
where his works are still to be seen in the best condition. F. Vincenzo
delle Vacche, also a native of Verona, and a layman of Oliveto,
mentioned by the learned Morelli in his _Notizia_ of works of design,
during the first half of the sixteenth century, deserves mention here
for the merit of his inlaid works; and in particular for those wrought
in Padua, at the church of S. Benedetto Novello. Unacquainted, however,
with the period in which he flourished, I shall not venture to announce
him either as a pupil or assistant to Fra Giovanni. Similar productions,
from the hand of Fra Raffaello da Brescia, also of Oliveto, adorning the
choir of S. Michele in Bosco at Bologna, might here be mentioned in
competition with those in the sacristy of Verona, by natives of Oliveto.
Moreover, there remains Fra Damiano da Bergamo, a Dominican monk, who
ornamented his own church at Bergamo, and that of Bologna in a still
better style; in which the choir is inlaid with the greatest art. In S.
Pietro, at Perugia, he also wrought the most beautiful histories. The
same artist, as we find recorded in Vasari, succeeded also in refining
the art of colours and of shades, to such a degree as to be held the
very first in this line. He possessed either a rival, or a pupil, in
Gianfrancesco Capodiferro, whose mansions at S. Maria Maggiore, in
Bergamo, are the finest specimens of the kind, though occasionally
betraying some traces of stiffness in their manner. There too he worked
after the designs of Lotto, and instructed in the art his brother Pietro
and his son Zinino, so that the city continued to be supplied with
excellent artificers during a number of years. The largest and most
artificially wrought figures I have seen in this line are in a choir of
the Certosa at Pavia, distributed one by one upon each side. The
artificer is said to have been one Bartolommeo da Pola, whose name I
have not met with elsewhere. In each of the squares is represented a
bust of one of the Apostles, or some other saint, designed in the taste
of the Da Vinci School. A few of the pictures of these artists are to be
found in galleries of art; among which, those from the hand of F.
Damiano are the most esteemed. Finally, this species of workmanship,
embracing materials too much exposed to the moth and to the fire, by
degrees began to grow out of date: and if more lately it appears to have
again revived, it has failed hitherto in producing any works deserving
of commemoration.
[Footnote 6: Rannusio Guerra di Costantinopoli, book iii. p. 94.]
[Footnote 7: Vol. vi. p. 88, anno 1808.]
[Footnote 8: See his _Descrizione delle Pitture_, &c. p. 19. The learned
Morelli also, in his Annotations to the _Notizia_, confirms, by fresh
arguments, the same epoch, p. 146.]
[Footnote 9: Page 101.]
[Footnote 10: This was given to the public by Muratori, with the
following title--_Riccobaldi Ferrariensis, sive anonimi scriptoris
compilatio chronologica usque ad annum 1312._ (Rerum Italicarum
Scriptores, vol. ix. p. 255.)]
[Footnote 11: Sig. Sasso observed one extremely like it in Venice, with
the subscription _Guglielmus pinxit_, 1368; from which he inferred that
he had belonged to the school of Guariento.]
[Footnote 12: This _Sebeto_ of Vasari appeared so new to Maffei, that he
would willingly have substituted Stefano; (_see Ver. Illust._ p. iii.
col. 152,) but Stefano da Verona, or da Zevio, is a name posterior to
these times. The _Notizia_ of the anonymous writer, recently published,
says, that the church of the before mentioned S. George was ornamented
by "Jacopo Davanzo, a Paduan, or a Veronese, if not, as some will have
it, a Bolognese; by Altichiero Veronese, according to Campagnuola, p.
6." It must be observed that Vasari also consulted the latter, or
probably one of his Latin letters to Niccolo Leonico Tomeo, quoting it
several times. (See Morelli, p. 101.) Now in this it was probably
written, _ab Alticherio de Jebeto_; that is, da Zevio, which was at one
time called _Jebetum_, and Vasari believed it to be the name of an
unknown painter. Such is the conjecture communicated to me by Sig.
Brandolese, and it appears extremely probable.]
[Footnote 13: Signor Abbate Morelli, since P. della Valle, has
discovered another painting existing in the Sacristy of the Padri
Conventuali, at Vicenza, with this inscription, 1333, PAULUS DE VENETIIS
PINXIT HOC OPUS, (_Notiz._ p. 222). He adds also, two other Venetian
painters, with whom I have enriched this new edition; the name of one
found in a small picture of the Conventuali, at S. Arcangelo, under an
image of the Virgin, among various saints, dated 1385. _Jachobelus de
Bonomo Venetus pinxit hoc opus._ The other, in the territory of
Verruchio, on a crucifixion, with the symbols of the four Evangelists,
is in the possession of the Agostiniani, and inscribed 1404: _Nicholaus
Paradixi miles de Venetiis pinxit_.]
[Footnote 14: Among these is counted Stefano Pievano, of St. Agnese, an
able artist, who left his name along with the date, 1381, on an
altarpiece of the _Assumption_:--a piece in which the Venetian colouring
is displayed to advantage, while the expression, lively and full of
meaning, compensates for its inaccuracy of design. Another artist
deserving of being known is Jacopo di _Alberegno_, whose family still
remains in Venice, and who has been ascertained to be the author of a
painting without date, representing the Crucifixion of our Saviour,
among various saints. Tommaso da Modena has also been referred to the
Venetian School, who, about the period of 1351, produced two Holy
Virgins at Venice; a St. Catherine, at present in the gallery of N. H.
Ascanio Molin, together with the two preceding, and other rare Venetian
pictures of the same epoch; and a S. Barbara, belonging to the Abbate
Mauro Boni, so fraught with expression, grace, and power of colouring,
as to lead me to conjecture he had flourished at a much later period,
were it not for the inscribed date. His beginning to be known at Venice
is some reason why he should be referred to this school, if the name of
his native place, _de Mutina_, did not restrain us from so doing without
some further doubt. The Ab. Boni, who has given us an account of these
pictures in an article put forth by the Italian academy, was the first
to discover them.]
[Footnote 15: Before their time, however, Bergamo could boast a school
of painting, as witness what Count Tassi adduces in a parchment of the
year 1296, naming a certain Guglielmo, _pittore_. It does not appear in
what style he drew. One of his successors, who painted the tree of St.
Bonaventura, abounding in sacred figures, shews himself an artist more
rude, indeed, but more original than either of the brothers de Nova. Of
his name we are, however, ignorant, as he only attached the date of
1347.]
[Footnote 16: In the work intitled _Narrazione dell'Isola di Murano_, by
_G. A. Moschini_, the supposition I have above stated has been combated
by its excellent author. A picture in the gallery of the N. H. Molin, at
Venice, subscribed _Johannes Vivarinus_, seems to have persuaded him of
my mistake. In a work embracing an account of some thousand painters, I
cannot pretend to boast of its being free from some human errors, and
was about to express my gratitude to the above mentioned author for
having pointed one of them out. But I am now convinced that the picture
is from the hand of another artist, and that the signature in question
is a forgery, the author of which has confounded the character of what
is called Gothic and Roman, in place of imitating the true character of
those times, which he might very easily have done, inasmuch as he had
before his eyes a small chart, with a most devout oration, _Deus meus
charitas_, &c. in the most complete Gothic, or rather German character
that can be conceived. The impostor therefore must have been extremely
ignorant of his art. The examination was made by the cavalier Gio. da
Lazara, Abate Mauro Boni, Bartolommeo Gamba, names sufficiently known to
the public to justify our adoption of their opinion. The very able
Brandolese has likewise pronounced the inscription false, and published
thereon a little work, entitled "_Doubts respecting the existence of
such a painter as Giovanni Vivarino da Murano, newly confirmed; and a
refutation of some recently asserted authority, to confirm them_." And
in this he displays much sound criticism, and many arguments, all
tending to strengthen my own conjecture.]
[Footnote 17: This artist ought not to be confounded with Jacometto da
Venezia, a miniature painter, and artist of the same age, but who
flourished somewhat later. He also was celebrated in his day, and is
frequently recorded in the _Notizia Morelli_, for his small pictures,
adapted for private rooms, his portraits, and his miniatures. It was
sometimes doubted whether a certain work was from the hand of John of
Bruges, of Antonello da Messina, or of Jacometto da Venezia. (_See
Notizia Morelli_, p. 74.)]
[Footnote 18: The picture referred to by the P. Moschini, in his
_Narrazione dell'Isola di Murano_, is not to be admitted as genuine, the
inscription upon it being forged by the same author, who counterfeited
that of Giovanni Vivarini, before alluded to in the note to page 22.]
[Footnote 19: See _Morelli Notizia_, p. 157.]
[Footnote 20: I had supposed, in my first edition of this work, misled
by the opposite names, that Sebeto was a different personage from this
Stefano da Zevio. I was afterwards undeceived by the appearance of the
work of the learned Brandolese, pronouncing them one and the same
artist; and I willingly here retract what I had before advanced,
expressing, at the same time, my acknowledgements for the emendation.]
[Footnote 21: _Drawn in the most perfect manner_, are the words of
Vasari, while he adds, that the whole of his works were imitated and
copied by Pietro di Perugia, an experienced artist in _fresco_, and more
especially in miniature, with which "he ornamented the whole of the
books in the library of Pope Pius," in the dome at Siena. He is not
known, however, in Perugia, nor mentioned at Siena among those employed
at the cathedral, as is noticed by Father della Valle; yet the present
work abounds with examples of artists, unknown in their own cities, on
account of having resided elsewhere; and the before mentioned annotator
of Vasari was unable to discover the name of Liberal da Verona, an
undoubted illustrator of the books, in such registers. I think we ought
not to refuse to give credit, therefore, to Vasari, as Father Guglielmo
insists; but to admit a new Pietro di Perugia, anterior to Vanucci, who
might design the frescos of Stefano in Verona and Mantua, so extolled in
the early part of 1400, and who copied them in those very beautiful and
graceful miniatures at Siena; an art which he probably acquired at
Verona, where it was then in such high repute.]
[Footnote 22: See on this head, the _Descrizione delle Bellezze di
Vicenza_, P. 1. p. 7.]
[Footnote 23: In the cathedral of Pordenone, under one of his
altarpieces, we read--
"Andreas Zeusis nostraeque aetatis Apelles
Hoc Bellunellus nobile pinxit opus." (_Altan._)]
[Footnote 24: Ruggieri indeed had acquired a great reputation in Italy
as early as 1449, when Ciriaco Anconitano, being in Ferrara, saw a
picture of Christ taken from the cross, belonging to the Duke. He thus
writes respecting the artist: _Rugerus Brugiensis pictorum decus_
AGATHEI TUCHEI.--_Rugierius in Brussella post praeclarum illum Brugiensem
picturae decus Joannem, insignis N. T. Pictor habetur_, &c. See Colucci
A. P. vol. xxiii. p. 143. He is also commended in high terms by
Bartolommeo Facio in his little work _De viris illustribus_. See
Morelli, _Notizia_, p. 239.]
[Footnote 25: He arrived there, and was at Rome in the _anno Santo_. See
Facius, lib. cit. p. 45.]
[Footnote 26: This is one of the usual mistakes found in Vasari.
Baldinucci (tom. iv. p. 17) calls him Ans or Hans. This is his Flemish
appellation, which in our tongue, signifies Giovanni; and in the
_Notizia_ Morelli he is termed Gianes da Brugia; somewhat nearer our own
tongue. With Sansovino he is Gio. di Bruggia, John of Bruges. See
Morelli, p. 117; and by him he is distinguished from _Gio. Van Eych_.]
[Footnote 27: In a similar taste was the perspective introduced by
Giovanni Bellino in his celebrated altarpiece at San Zaccaria, in
Venice. Another was placed in the great altar of the dome at Capo
d'Istria, by Carpaccio the elder, still more striking. In the background
of the picture, the virgin appears seated on a magnificent throne, with
the divine infant, in an upright posture, upon her knees, surrounded by
six of the most venerable patrons of the place, disposed around her, in
three ranks, displaying a fine diversity of drapery as well as of
action. To these are added some cherubs, engaged in playing upon musical
instruments, and apparently beholding the spectator with an air of
puerile simplicity, as if inviting him to caress them. A long and lofty
colonnade, in excellent perspective, leads the way to the throne, at one
time united to a fine stone colonnade, which extended from the
altarpiece through the chapel, producing a fine illusion, amounting to a
sort of enchantment of perspective. It was removed along with the stone
columns, in order to enlarge the tribune. The oldest citizens, who
witnessed this beautiful spectacle, speak of it to strangers with
delight, and I am glad to put it on record, before the recollection of
it be entirely obliterated.]
[Footnote 28: _Notizia_, p. 63.]
[Footnote 29: Albert Durer, arriving the same year at Venice, bestowed
on Giovanni one of the most favourable testimonies to his talents that
now remains. After rebuking the envy of the other painters, who spoke of
him with contempt, he says of him:--"Every one assures me that he is
_Gran Galantuomo_, for which reason I wish him well. He is already very
old, but, notwithstanding, the best painter we have." V. _Morel. Not._
p. 224.]
[Footnote 30: The country is impressed with this persuasion in spite of
his own signatures, attached even to the pictures in Istria. In that,
cited at page 48, it is written _Victor Charpatius Venetus pinxit,
1516_; in another, at San Francesco di Pirano, _Victoris Charpatii
Veneti opus, 1519_. Benedetto Carpaccio, probably a son or nephew of the
preceding, was also a Venetian, of whom there remains a picture of the
Coronation of the Virgin, at Capo d'Istria, in the Rotunda, subscribed,
_Benetto Carpathio Veneto pingeva, 1537_. At the Osservanti, is the
picture of the _Nome di Gesu_, with the same words, but dated 1541. He
is not mentioned in Venetian history, though highly deserving a place in
it; for whatever traces he retains of the ancient stiffness of manner,
in the extremity of his figures, yet he yields not to many in softness
of tints; in the taste of his colours; expression of features, and the
effect of his chiaroscuro. I am led to think, that from residing out of
the capital, this artist was supposed to be a native of Istria, but he
was indisputably of a Venetian family, most probably tracing its origin
from Murano.]
[Footnote 31: We find traces of his paintings from the year 1507. See
Tassi, in his _Lives of the Painters, &c._ p. 56, where he corrects a
mistake of Zanetti, who, instead of one painter, had divided him into
two. One of his pictures, in the parish church of Endine, will remove
every doubt. There he signed himself, _Franciscus Rizus Bergomensis
habitator Venetiis, 1529_. In another piece, in the parochial church of
Serina, he wrote _Francesco Rizo da Santa Croxe depense, 1518_. His last
work, of which I find any account, is also in the parochial church of
Chirignano, in the Mestrina, dated 1541. Father Federici, who describes
it, makes Francesco the son of Girolamo da S. Croce, or S. Croce, whose
name we find subscribed in both ways, but not ever Rizo. I cannot agree
with him, first, because Ridolfi says only, (p. 62,) that they were of
_the same family_; second, because the pictures of Girolamo, according
to Tassi, commence later, and are traced also later than those of
Francesco, that is in 1549; and thirdly, because the style of Girolamo
is incomparably more modernized, as we shall presently shew.]
[Footnote 32: Morelli _Notizia_, p. 212.]
[Footnote 33: In the _Statuti de' Pittori_, it is written Mireti; and
the same work contains memoirs of him in 1423 and 1441; years, however,
which do not accord with his dependence on the Bellini. This Girolamo
might possibly have been the brother, or other relation, of that Gio.
Miretto, for whom see p. 13. These two names will do away with the
_Moreto_ of Vasari, and we must substitute Mireto or Miretto.]
[Footnote 34: I repeat the epigram, which is subscribed in ancient
characters, on the strength of which we may believe that the work was
esteemed one of the most valuable the art had produced up to that
period, transcribed by the very frequently commended Sig. Co. Cav.
Lazara; it is thus:
Non hic Parrhasio, non hic tribuendus Apelli,
Hos licet Auctores dignus habere labor.
Euganeus, vixdum impleto ter mense, Jacobus
Ex Montagnana nobile pinxit opus.]
[Footnote 35: He is thus named in the "Statuti de' Pittori," of Padua,
and in the _MS. Zen._ whence we may correct Ridolfi, who calls him
Girolamo.]
[Footnote 36: In vol. iii. ed. Rom. p. 427, it is written by mistake
Mantegna, where it says that he, Speranza, and Veruzio, studied design
under Mantegna.]
[Footnote 37: Padre Faccioli, in his third volume of the _Inscrizioni
della Citta e territorio di Vicenza_, records the following epigraph,
_Jo. Sperantiae de Vangeribus me pinxit_, in which Vangeribus may,
perhaps, apply to some small village in the territory of Vicenza. He is
wholly silent respecting Veruzio, thus confirming the suspicion that his
name is a mere mistake of Vasari, whom it is hoped our posterity will
still continue to correct, and yet leave sufficient employment for their
children. The following is my conjecture. P. Faccioli gives an account
of a picture that remains in S. Francesco di Schio; it is composed in
the manner usually adopted in the composition of the marriage of S.
Catherine; and there are also other saints well executed in the Mantegna
style, as is observed by the Cav. Gio. de Lazara, whose authority I
esteem excellent. It bears the inscription, "Franciscus Verlus de
Vicentia pinxit xx. Junii. M. D. XII.;" and to this is added by Faccioli
another old painting by the same hand, remaining at Sercedo. Now I
contend that the name of this painter, being reported to Vasari, with
its diminutive termination, like many others, borrowed either from the
stature or the age, (in the Venetian dialect it was Verlucio or Verluzo)
it was afterwards given by him in his history as Veruzio. The critics of
the Greek writers will know how to do me justice in this, for this mode
of discovering and correcting names I have derived from them.]
[Footnote 38: To judge from some pictures at Bergamo, we might suppose
him educated in the style of the fourteenth century; but he afterwards
approached nearer to the modern, as we perceive at Padua, where he
resembles Palma Vecchio; and this is sufficiently conspicuous also in
Friuli, where we make mention of him at a more cultivated era.]
[Footnote 39: In this character is the larger picture at S. Niccolo, a
church of the Dominicans in Treviso, in which the cupola, the columns,
and the perspective, with the throne of the virgin seated with the
infant Jesus, and surrounded by saints standing, the steps ornamented by
a harping seraph, all discover Bellini's composition; but I had not seen
the work, until after the former edition of my history at Bassano. It
was painted in 1520, by P. Marco Pensaben, assisted by P. Marco
Maraveia, both Dominican priests, engaged for the purpose from Venice.
They remained there until July, 1521, when the first of them secretly
fled from the convent, and the altarpiece of Treviso was completed in a
month by one Gian-Girolamo, a painter invited from Venice; supposed to
be Girolamo Trevisano, the younger. This artist is not, however,
mentioned, as I am aware, either, by the citizens, or by foreigners, by
any other name than Girolamo, and calculating from the chronology of
Ridolfi, he must then have been thirteen years of age. Until this
subject be more clearly investigated, I must confess my ignorance of
such a Gian-Girolamo. But I am better acquainted with the name of
Pensaben, who was afterwards found, and in 1524 was, as before, a
Dominican friar at Venice; but a few years after, in 1530, is mentioned
in authentic books belonging to the order, being registered among those
who had either left the order or were dead. P. Federici believes him to
have been the same as F. Bastiano del Piombo, an untenable supposition,
as I have elsewhere shown. I believe Pensaben to have been an excellent
artist in the Bellini manner, though not commemorated in history, nor by
his order. In an order so prolific with genius, and in an age abounding
with great names, he is by no means a solitary instance of this: the
present work being found to contain many other examples.]
[Footnote 40: As early as the eleventh century, or thereabouts, it would
appear that some similar kind of art was in repute in Germany. The monk
Theophilus, in the works before mentioned, "De omni scientia artis
pingendi," alluding, at the commencement, to the most esteemed
productions of every country, observes: "quidquid in fenestrarum
varietate preciosa diligit Francia; quidquid in auri, argenti, cupri,
ferri, lignorum, lapidumque subtilitate sollers laudat Germania."
_Codice Viennese._]
VENETIAN SCHOOL.
SECOND EPOCH.
_Giorgione, Titian, Tintoret, Jacopo da Bassano, Paolo
Veronese._
Behold us at length arrived at the golden period of the Venetian School,
which like the others of Italy, produced its most distinguished
ornaments about the year 1500; artists who at once eclipsed the fame of
their predecessors, and the hopes of attaining to equal excellence on
the part of their successors. In reaching this degree of eminence, it is
true they pursued different paths, though they all aimed at acquiring
the same perfection of colouring; the most natural, the most lively, and
the most applauded of any single school of the age; a distinction they
likewise conferred upon their posterity, forming the distinguishing
characteristic of the Venetian painters. The merit of this has been
attributed to the climate by some, who assert, that in Venice, and the
adjacent places, nature herself has bestowed a warmer and deeper colour
upon objects than elsewhere; a frivolous supposition, and undeserving of
much of our attention, inasmuch as the artists of Holland and Flanders,
in climates so extremely opposite, have obtained the same meed of
praise. Neither is it to be attributed to the quality of the colours;
both Giorgione and Titian having been known to make use of few, and
these, so far from being selected or procured elsewhere, exposed to sale
in all the public shops in Venice. If it should again be objected, that
in those days the colours were sold purer and less adulterated, I admit
there may be some degree of truth in this, inasmuch as Passeri, in his
life of Orbetto, complained at that time of the early decay of many
pictures, "owing to the quality of the colours fraudulently sold by the
retailers." But I would merely inquire, if it were possible, that
materials thus pure and uncontaminated should so often fall into the
hands of the Venetians and their Flemish imitators, yet be so seldom met
with in the rest of the schools. The cause of their superiority is to be
sought, therefore, in their mechanism and art of colouring; in regard to
which the best Venetian painters conformed, in some points, to the most
celebrated artists of Italy. In other points, however, they differed
from them. It was a common practice at that period, to prepare with a
chalk surface the altarpieces and pictures which were intended to be
executed; and that white ground, favourable to every variety of tint the
painter could lay upon it, equally favoured the production of a certain
polish, floridity, and surprising transparency; a custom which, being
laid aside out of indolence and avarice, I am happy to perceive seems
about to be renewed. But in addition to this the Venetians were in
possession of an art that may be considered peculiar to themselves. For
it may be observed, that the chief part of them during these three
centuries, produced the effect of their paintings, not so much by a
strong layer of colours, as by separate strokes of the pencil; and each
colour being thus adapted to its place, without much repeating or
refining it, they still continued augmenting the work, by which the
tints were preserved clear and virgin; a result which requires no less
promptness of hand than of intellect, besides education, and a taste
cultivated from the earliest period. Hence the artist Vecchia was
accustomed to say, that by dint of copying pictures executed with
diligence, a painter will acquire the same quality; but to succeed in
copies from a Titian or a Paolo, and to imitate their stroke, is a task
surmounted only by the Venetians, whether natives or educated in their
school. (_Boschini_, p. 274.)
Should it here be inquired what good result may attend such a method, I
reply that Boschini points out two very considerable ones. The first of
them is, that by this mode of colouring, which he terms _di macchia_ and
_di pratica_, a certain hardness of style may more easily be avoided;
and the other, that, better than any other, it gives a bolder relief to
paintings in the distance: and pictures being intended to be thus
viewed, rather than closer to the eye, such an object is by this process
most easily attainable. I am aware of the moderns having misapplied and
abused these maxims; but they were meant to have been judiciously
employed, and I only wish to propose as examples the most celebrated of
the school who so ably comprehended the method, and the limits of such a
practice. Nor was the harmony of colours better understood by any other
artists, insomuch, that the mode of assimilating and of contrasting
them, may be considered as the second source of the delightful and
lively, so predominant in their works, and more especially in those of
Titian and his contemporaries.
Such skill was not merely confined to the fleshy parts, in whose colour
the disciples of Titian have so far excelled every other school; it
extended also to the drapery. For indeed, there are no pieces of
velvets, of stuffs, or of crapes, which they did not imitate to
perfection, more particularly in their portraits, in which the Venetians
of that period abounded, displaying specimens the most ornamental and
beautiful. The cavalier Mengs is of opinion, that also to this branch of
the art, requiring the strictest attention to truth, and conferring a
peculiar kind of interest upon a picture, may be in some measure
attributed the degree of power and truth acquired by those eminent
colourists. Their merit was moreover conspicuous in imitating every kind
of work in gold, in silver, and every species of metal; so much so, that
there are no royal palaces or lordly feasts, read of in any poet, which
do not appear more nobly represented in some Venetian paintings. It was
equally remarkable in point of landscape, which sometimes surpassed the
efforts of the Flemish painters, and in architectural views, which, with
a magnificence unknown elsewhere, they succeeded in introducing into
their compositions, as we had before occasion to observe of the artists
of the fourteenth century; a species of industry extremely favourable,
likewise, to the distribution, the variety, and to the complete effect
of groups of figures.
In these extensive compositions, which about the period of the Bellini
abounded in half-length or diminutive figures, there has since been
displayed a grandeur of proportions which has led the way to the most
enlarged productions, on the scale we have more recently seen. The most
terrific among these is the Supper of Paolo Veronese at S. Giorgio, in
which the gifts of nature are so nobly seconded by the exhibition of
talent, which appears to have been transmitted by succession through
this school, nearly until the present day. Such ability consists in
finely designing all the details of any work, however great, including
the transmission and gradations of light, so that the eye of itself
seems to follow its track, and embraces the entire effect from one end
of the canvass to the other. And it has been observed by several who
have witnessed ancient paintings (a violation of good taste, of late but
too common,) cut up and curtailed to adapt them to the size of walls and
doors, that such an operation often succeeds tolerably well with the
pictures of other schools, but is extremely difficult with those of the
Venetians; so intimately is one part connected with another, and
harmonized with the whole.
These, along with other similar qualities that flatter the eye of the
spectator, that attract the learned and the unlearned, and seem to
transport the mind by the novelty and the reality of the representation,
constitute a style which is termed by Reynolds the ornamental, who,
likewise, among all the schools, yields the palm in this to the
Venetians; a style afterwards introduced by Vovet into France, by Rubens
into Flanders, and by Giordano into Naples and into Spain. The same
English critic places it in the second rank, next to the grand style,
and remarks that the professors of the sublime were fearful of falling
into luxurious and pompous exhibitions of the accessaries; no less
because prejudicial to the artist's industry in point of design and in
point of expression, than because the transitory impression which it
produces upon the spectator, seldom reaches the heart. And truly, as the
sublime of Tully is more simple than the ornament of Pliny, and seems to
dread any excitement of admiration for the beautiful, lest its energy
should be unnerved by too studied a degree of elegance; so is it with
the grandeur of Michelangiolo and of Raffaello, that without seeking to
occupy us with the illusions of art, goes at once to the heart;
terrifies or inspires us; awakens emotions of pity, of veneration, and
the love of truth, exalting us, as it were, above ourselves, and leading
us to indulge, even in spite of ourselves, the most delicious of all
feelings, in that of wonder. It is upon this account that Reynolds
considered it dangerous for students to become enamoured of the Venetian
style; an opinion, which, judiciously understood, may prove of much
service to such artists as are calculated to succeed in the more
sublime. But since amidst such diversity of talent, there must appear
artists better adapted to adorn than to express; it would not be
advisable that their genius should be urged into a career in which it
will leave them always among the last, withdrawing them, at the same
time, from another in which they might have taken the lead. Let him,
therefore, who in this art of silent eloquence possesses not the energy
and spirit of Demosthenes, apply himself wholly, heart and soul, to the
elegance, the pomp, and the copiousness of Demetrius Phalereus.
Let it not from this be supposed, that the sole merit of the Venetians
consists in surprising the spectator by the effects of ornament and
colour, and that the customary style and true method of painting, were
not understood in those parts. Yet I am aware of the opinion of many
foreigners, who having never removed beyond their native spot, are
inclined to pronounce a general censure upon these artists, as being
ignorant of design, too laboured in their composition, unacquainted with
ideal beauty, and even unable to understand expression, costume, and
grace; finally, that the rapidity so much in vogue with the whole of the
school,[41] led them to despise the rules of art, not permitting them to
complete the work before them, out of an anxiety to engage in other
labours, for the sake of the profits afforded by them. To some of their
painters, doubtless, these observations may apply, but assuredly not to
the whole; for if one city be obnoxious to them, another is not so much
so; or if they can be affirmed of a certain epoch or class of artists,
it would be an idle attempt to fix them upon all. This school is in
truth most abundant, no less in artists than in fine examples in every
characteristic of the art; but neither one nor the other are
sufficiently known and appreciated. Yet it is hoped the reader will be
enabled to form a more correct idea of both; and after having cultivated
an acquaintance with the Bellini, the Giorgioni, and the Titians,
besides other masters, will trace, as it were from one parent stock, the
various offshoots transplanted throughout the state, imbibing, according
to the nature of the soil, and the vicinity of other climes, new tastes
and qualities, without losing at the same time their original and native
flavour. And if in the progress of our history we shall here and there,
among plants of nobler growth, meet with some "_lazzi sorbi_," to use
the words of our poet, some bitter apples, growing at their side; let
these only be attacked; but let not the disgrace attaching to a few
careless artists be calumniously extended to the whole of their school.
The happy era we are now entering upon, commences with Giorgione and
with Titian, two names which, connected together, yet in competition
with each other, divided between them, as it were, the whole body of
disciples throughout the capital and the state; insomuch that we find no
city that had not more or less adopted for its model one or other of
these masters. I shall proceed to describe them separately, each with
his own class, as I believe such a method most favourable, to shew how
the whole of the school I am describing was almost entirely derived and
propagated from two masters of a similar style. Giorgio Barbarelli of
Castelfranco, more generally known by the name of Giorgione, from a
certain grandeur conferred upon him by nature, no less of mind than
form, and which appears also impressed upon his productions, as the
character is said to be in the handwriting, was educated in the school
of the Bellini. But impelled by a spirit conscious of its own powers, he
despised that minuteness in the art which yet remained to be exploded,
at once substituting for it a certain freedom and audacity of manner, in
which the perfection of painting consists. In this view he may be said
to be an inventor; no artist before his time having acquired that
mastery of his pencil, so hardy and determined in its strokes, and
producing such an effect in the distance. From that period he continued
to ennoble his manner, rendering the contours more round and ample, the
foreshortenings more new, the expression of the countenance more warm
and lively, as well as the motions of his figures. His drapery, with all
the other accessaries of the art became more select, the gradations of
the different colours more soft and natural, and his chiaroscuro more
powerful and effective. It was in this last indeed, that Venetian
painting was the most deficient, while it had been introduced into the
rest of the schools by Vinci previous to the sixteenth century. Vasari
is of opinion that from the same artist, or rather from some of his
designs, it was first acquired by Giorgione, a supposition that Boschini
will not admit, maintaining that he was only indebted for it to himself,
being his own master and scholar. And, in truth, the taste of Lionardo
and of the Milanese artists who acquired it from him, not only differs
in point of design, inclining in the contours and in the features more
towards the graceful and the beautiful, while Giorgione affects rather a
round and full expression; but it is contrasted with it, likewise, in
the chiaroscuro. The composition of Lionardo abounds much more in
shades, which are gradually softened with greater care; while in regard
to his lights he is far more sparing, and studies to unite them in a
small space with a degree of vividness that produces surprise.
Giorgione's composition, on the other hand, is more clear and open, and
with less shade; his middle tints, also, partake in nothing of the
ironcast and grey, but are natural and beautiful; and in short, he
approaches nearer to the style of Coreggio, if Mengs at least judges
rightly, than to any other master. Still I am far from concluding that
Vinci in no way contributed to the formation of Giorgione's new manner;
every improvement in the art having taken its rise from some former one,
which being admired for its novelty, became familiar to surrounding
artists by example, and to more distant ones by its reputation, thus
adding what was before wanting to the perfection of the art. And in this
way have geniuses in different parts arisen, destined to increase and
improve such advantages. This, if I mistake not, has been the case with
the science of perspective, subsequent to the time of Pier della
Francesca; with regard to foreshortening after Melozzo; and also with
chiaroscuro after Lionardo.
The works of Giorgione were, for the chief part, executed in fresco,
upon the facades of the houses, more particularly in Venice, where there
now remains scarcely a relic of them, as if to remind us only of what
have perished. Many of his pictures, on the other hand, both there and
in other places, painted in oil and preserved in private houses, are
found in excellent condition; the cause of which is attributed to the
strong mixture of the colours, and to the full and liberal use of his
pencil. In particular we meet with portraits, remarkable for the soul of
their expression, for the air of their heads, the novelty of the
garments, of the hair, of the plumes, and of the arms, no less than for
the lively imitation of the living flesh, in which, however warm and
sanguine are the tints which he applied, he adds to them so much grace,
that in spite of thousands of imitators, he still stands alone. In
analyzing some of these tints, Ridolfi discovered that they bore little
resemblance to those used by the ancient Greeks, and quite distinct from
those tawny, brown, and azure colours, since introduced at the expense
of the more natural. Such of his pictures as are composed in the style
of his Dead Christ, in the Monte di Pieta at Trevigi, the S. Omobono at
the Scuola de' Sarti, in Venice, or the Tempest stilled by the Saint, at
that of S. Marco, in which among other figures are those of three rowers
drawn naked, excellent both in their design and their attitudes; such
are the rarest triumphs of his art. The city of Milan possesses two of
an oblong shape, in which several of the figures extend beyond the
proportions of Poussin, and may be pronounced rather full than
beautiful. One of these is to be viewed at the Ambrosiana, the other in
the archepiscopal palace; esteemed by some the happiest effort of
Giorgione that now survives. It represents the child Moses just rescued
from the Nile, and presented to the daughter of Pharaoh. Very few
colours, but well harmonized and distributed, and finely broken with the
shades, produce a sort of austere union, if I may be allowed the
expression, and may be assimilated to a piece of music composed of few
notes, but skilfully adapted, and delightful beyond any more noisy
combination of sounds.
Giorgione died at the early age of thirty-four, in 1511. Thus his
productions, rather than the pupils he educated, remained to instruct
the Venetians. Vasari, however, mentions several who have been contested
by other writers. A Pietro Luzzo is recorded by Ridolfi;--a native of
Feltre, called Zarato, or Zarotto,--who after being a pupil became a
rival of Giorgione, and seduced from his house a woman, to whom he was
passionately attached, at whose loss it has been asserted by some that
the disappointed artist died in despair. By others, on the contrary, he
is said to have died of a disease contracted during his intercourse with
the same lady. This Zarato, as we read in a MS. history of Feltre, and
in a MS. upon the pictures of Udine, is the same whom Vasari entitles,
_Morto da Feltro_; and adds, that he went when young to Rome, and
subsequently flourished in Florence and elsewhere, distinguished for his
skill in grotesques; of which more hereafter. Going afterwards to
Venice, he is known to have assisted Giorgione in the paintings he made
for the Fondaco de' Tedeschi, about the year 1505; and, lastly, having
remained some time at his native place, he embraced a military life,
obtaining the rank of captain. Proceeding to Zara, he fell in battle
near that place in his forty-fifth year; at least such is the account of
Vasari. From the mention of his native place of Feltre, his assisting
Giorgione in his works, and his surnames of _Zarato_ and _Morto_, I
think there is some degree of probability in the assertion contained in
these MSS. though the dates attaching to the life of Morto in Vasari,
will not countenance the supposition of Ridolfi, of his being the pupil
of Giorgione, a man considerably younger than himself; so that I should
conjecture that Ridolfi may have denominated him a scholar of Giorgione,
because, when already of a mature age, he painted under him as his
assistant. Notwithstanding the assertion of Vasari, he had a tolerable
genius for figures, and in the history already cited, written by
Cambrucci, and in possession of the bishop of Feltre, a picture of our
Lady between saints Francesco and Antonio, placed at S. Spirito, and
another at Villabruna, besides a figure of Curtius on horseback, upon a
house at Teggie, are attributed to his hand. We gather from the same
history that another Luzzi, by name Lorenzo, a contemporary and perhaps
friend of Pietro, painted very skilfully in fresco, at the church of S.
Stefano; and that he was equally successful in oils, he himself assures
us in his altarpiece of the proto-martyr S. Stefano, conspicuous for
correctness of design, beauty of forms, force of tints, and bearing his
name and the date of 1511.
The most distinguished disciple of the school of Giorgione is
Sebastiano, a Venetian, commonly called, from the habit and office he
afterwards assumed at Rome, Fra Sebastiano del Piombo. Having left Gian
Bellini, he attached himself to Giorgione, and in the tone of his
colours, and the fulness of his forms, imitated him better than any
other artist. An altarpiece in S. Gio. Crisostomo, from his hand, was by
some mistaken for the work of his master; so strikingly does it abound
with his manner. It may be presumed, indeed, that he was assisted in the
design; Sebastiano being known to possess no surprising richness of
invention,--slow in the composition of most of his figures; irresolute;
eager to undertake, but difficult to commence, and most difficult in the
completion. Hence we rarely meet with any of his histories or his
altarpieces comparable to the Nativity of the Virgin, at S. Agostino, in
Perugia, or the _Flagellazione_ at the Osservanti of Viterbo, which is
esteemed the best picture in the city. Pictures for private rooms, and
portraits, he painted in great number, and with comparative ease; and we
no where meet with more beautiful hands, more rosy flesh tints, or more
novel accessaries than in these. Thus, in taking the portrait of Pietro
Aretino, he distinguished five different tints of black in his dress;
imitating with exactness those of the velvet, of the satin, and so of
the rest. Being invited to Rome by Agostino Chigi, and there esteemed as
one of the first colourists of his time, he painted in competition with
Peruzzi, and with Raffaello himself; and the rival labours of all three
are still preserved in a hall of the Farnesina, at that period the house
of the Chigi.
Sebastiano became aware, that in such a competition, his own design
would not appear to much advantage in Rome, and he improved it. But
occasionally he fell into some harshness of manner, owing to the
difficulties he there encountered. Yet, in several of his works, he was
assisted by Michelangiolo, from whose design he painted that _Pieta_,
placed at the Conventuali of Viterbo, and the Transfiguration, with the
other pieces which he produced, during six years, for S. Pietro in
Montorio, at Rome. It is stated by Vasari, that Michelangiolo united
with him, in order to oppose the too favourable opinion entertained by
the Romans, of Raffaello. He adds, that on the death of the latter,
Sebastiano was universally esteemed the first artist of his time, upheld
by the favour of Michelangiolo; Giulio Romano, and the rest of the rival
school, being all inferior to him. I am almost at a loss how to judge of
a fact, which, if discredited, seems to cast an imputation upon the
historian, and, if received, reflects very little credit upon
Buonarotti; and the reader will do best, perhaps, to decide for himself.
The name of Sebastiano must also be added to the list of inventors, for
his new method of oil painting upon stone, upon which plan he executed
the _Flagellazione_, for S. Pietro in Montorio, a work as much defaced
by time as the others which he made in fresco remain at the same place
entire. He coloured also upon stone several pictures for private houses,
a practice highly esteemed at its earlier period, but which was soon
abandoned owing to the difficulty of carriage. Upon this plan, or some
other resembling it, we find several pictures of the sixteenth century
executed, and which, at this period, are esteemed in museums real
antiques.[42]
Among the disciples of the School of Giorgione, were, likewise, Gio. da
Udine and Francesco Torbido, a Veronese, who has been surnamed _il
Moro_, and both were distinguished practisers of his tints. In regard to
Giovanni, afterwards a pupil of Raffaello, we have written, and we shall
again write elsewhere. Moro remained but little with Giorgione, a much
longer while with Liberale. Of this last he imitated very truly both the
diligence and the design, in the former even surpassing him; always a
severe critic upon himself, and slow in completing his undertakings. We
rarely meet with him in altarpieces, still more rarely in collections of
paintings, for which he was often employed in sacred subjects and in
portraits; deficient in nothing, except, perhaps, we could wish to see
somewhat greater freedom of hand. In the dome of Verona, he painted
several histories in fresco, among which is the Assumption of the
Virgin, truly admirable; but the designs are not his, Giulio Romano
having prepared the cartoons. His style of execution, however, is
clearly enough perceived, which, in respect to colouring and to
chiaroscuro, discovers him to be an artist, as Vasari has recorded, "as
careful in regard to his use of colours, as any other who flourished at
the same period."
The other names that here follow, are included, according to history, in
the train of Giorgione, not as his pupils, but his imitators. Yet all
exhibit traces of Bellini, because the Venetian manner, up to the time
of Tintoretto, did not so much aim at inventing new things, as at
perfecting such as had already been discovered; not so desirous of
relinquishing the taste of the Bellini, as of modernizing it upon the
model of Titian and Giorgione. Hence it arose, that a people of painters
were formed in a taste extremely uniform; and the exaggerated
observation, "that whoever had cultivated an acquaintance with one
Venetian artist of that age, knew them all," seemed to have some ground
in truth. But still, as I have said, it is exaggeration, as there is
certainly much diversity of style and merit when compared with one
another. Among the leading disciples of Giorgione are to be ranked
three, who belong to the city or territory of Bergamo, and these are
Lotto, as is most generally supposed, Palma, and Cariani. They resemble
their master most frequently in fulness, but in the mixture and
selection of colours they often appear of the school of Lombardy. More
particularly in Cariani there is apparent a certain superficies, like
that of wax, equally diffused over the canvass, which shines so as to
enliven the eye; and when seen at a distance, with but little light,
appears in full relief, a result which others have also noticed in the
works of Coreggio.
The name of Lorenzo Lotto is recorded by Vasari and elsewhere, in which
accounts his country is considered as consisting of the entire state, as
he himself, indeed, affixed to his picture of S. Cristoforo di Loreto,
_Laurentius Lottus Pictor Venetus_.[43] The late annotator of Vasari,
observing the grace of countenance and the turn of the eyes remarkable
in his pictures, supposed him to be a disciple of Vinci, an opinion that
might be supported by the authority of Lomazzo, who mentions the names
of Cesare da Sesto and Lorenzo Lotto together, both being imitators, in
the distribution of their lights, of da Vinci. Lotto most likely
profited by his vicinity to Milan, in order to cultivate an acquaintance
with, and to imitate Vinci in many points; though I am not, therefore,
inclined to discredit the account which gives him for a pupil to
Bellini, and a rival to Castelfranco. But the style of the disciples of
Lionardo, so uniform in Luini and in the other Milanese, is very
slightly perceptible in the productions of Lotto. His manner is, in
truth, wholly Venetian, bold in its colours, luxurious in its draperies,
and like Giorgione, of a deep red in the fleshy parts. His hand,
however, is less bold and free than that of the latter, whose loftier
character he is fond of tempering with the play, as it were, of his
middle tints; selecting, at the same time, lighter forms, to whose heads
he gives a character more placid and a beauty more ideal. In the
background of his pictures he often retains a peculiar clear or azure
colour, which if it do not harmonize so much with the figures, confers
distinctness on each individual, and presents them in a very lively
manner to the eye. His pictures of S. Antonino, at the Dominicans in
Venice, and of S. Niccolo, at the Carmine, which design he repeated in
the S. Vincenzio of the Dominicans at Recanati, are compositions
extremely novel and original. In his others he varies little from the
usual style; that of a Madonna seated on a throne, surrounded with
saints, with cherubs in the air, or upon the steps. Yet these he
relieves by the novelty of perspective, or by attitudes, or contrasted
views. Thus in his specimen of the S. Bartolommeo, at Bergamo, entitled
by Ridolfi wonderful, he bestows upon the Virgin and the infant Jesus
such finely diversified and contrasted motions, that they seem as if
conversing with the holy bystanders, the one on the right and the other
on the left hand. And in that of S. Spirito, sparkling as it were with
graces, we meet with a figure of S. John the Baptist, drawn as a child,
standing at the foot of the throne, in the act of embracing a lamb, and
expressing so natural and lively a joy, at once so simple and innocent,
with a smile so beautiful, that we can hardly believe while we gaze upon
it, that Raffaello or Correggio could have gone beyond it.
Such masterpieces as these, with others that are to be seen at Bergamo,
in churches and private collections, place him almost on a level with
the first luminaries of the art. If Vasari did not fairly appreciate his
merits, it arose only from his having viewed several of his less studied
and less noble pieces. And it is true that he has not always exhibited
the same degree of excellence, or force of design. The period in which
he chiefly flourished may be computed from the year 1513, when he was
selected, among many professors of reputation, to adorn the altar for
the church of the Dominicans at Bergamo; and, perhaps, the decline of
his powers ought to be dated from 1546, an epoch inscribed upon his
picture of San Jacopo dell'Orio, in Venice. He was employed also at
Ancona, and in particular at the church of S. Dominico, at Recanati,
where, interspersed among pieces of superior power, more especially in
his smaller pictures, we detect some incorrectness in his extremities,
and stiffness of composition, resembling that of Gian Bellini; whether,
as it is conjectured by Vasari, they were among the earliest, or more
probably among some of his latest efforts. For it is well known, that
when far advanced in years, he was accustomed to retire to Loreto, a
little way from Recanati, and that engaged in continual supplication to
the Virgin, in order that she might guide him into a better method, he
there closed the period of his days in tranquillity.
Jacopo Palma, commonly called _Palma Vecchio_, to distinguish him from
his great-nephew Jacopo, was invariably considered the companion and
rival of Lotto, until such time as Combe first confused the historical
dates relating to him. By Ridolfi we are told that Palma employed
himself in completing a picture left imperfect by Titian, at the period
of his death in 1576. Upon this, and similar authorities, Combe takes
occasion to postpone the birth of Palma, until 1540; adding to which the
forty-eight years assigned him by Vasari, the time of his decease is
placed in 1588. In such arrangement the critic seems neither to have
paid attention to the style of Jacopo, still retaining some traces of
the antique, nor to the authority of Ridolfi, who makes him the master
of Bonifazio, any more than to Vasari's testimony, in the work published
in 1568, declaring him to have died several years before that period in
Venice. He does not even consider, what he might more easily have
ascertained, that there was another Jacopo Palma, great-nephew of the
elder, who, according to the authority of Boschini (p. 110), was a pupil
of Titian's as long as the latter survived; and that Ridolfi, on this
occasion, entitled him _Palma_, without the addition of _younger_, on
account of its being so extremely unlikely that any would confound him
with the elder Palma. Such, notwithstanding, was the case, and is, in
fact, only a slight sample of the inaccuracies of the whole work. The
same error has been repeated by too many authors, even among the
Italians; and the most amusing of all is, that Palma the elder is said
to have been born about the year 1540, while almost, in the same breath,
the younger Palma is declared to have been born in 1544. So much must
here suffice as to his age, proceeding in the next instance to his
style.
Much attached to the method of Giorgione, he aimed at attaining his
clearness of expression, and vivacity of colouring. In his celebrated
picture of Saint Barbara, at S. Maria Formosa, one of his most powerful
and characteristic productions, Jacopo more especially adopted him as
his model. In some of his other pieces, he more nearly approaches
Titian, a resemblance we are told by Ridolfi, consisting in the peculiar
grace which he acquired from studying the earliest productions of that
great master. Of this kind is the Supper of Christ, painted for Santa
Maria _Mater Domini_, with the Virgin at San Stefano di Vicenza,
executed with so much sweetness of expression as to be esteemed one of
his happiest productions. There are many examples of both styles to be
met with in the grand Carrara collection, as given in the list of Count
Tassi, (p. 93). Finally, Zanetti is of opinion that in some others he
displays a more original genius, as exemplified in the Epiphany of the
island of Saint Helena, where he equally shines in the character of a
naturalist who selects well, who carefully disposes his draperies, and
who composes according to good rules. The distinguishing character then
of his pieces is diligence, refinement, and a harmony of tints, so great
as to leave no traces of the pencil; and it has been observed by one of
his historians, that he long occupied himself in the production of each
piece, and frequently retouched it. In the mixture of his colours, as
well as other respects, he often resembles Lotto, and if he be less
animated and sublime, he is, perhaps, generally speaking, more beautiful
in the form of his heads, especially in those of boys and women. It is
the opinion of some, that in several of his countenances he expressed
the likeness of his daughter Violante, very nearly related to Titian,
and a portrait of whom, by the hand of her father, was to be seen in the
gallery of Sera, a Florentine gentleman, who purchased at Venice many
rarities for the House of the Medici, as well as for himself, (Boschini,
p. 368). A variety of pictures intended for private rooms, met with in
different places in Italy, have also been attributed to the hand of
Palma; besides portraits, one of which has been commended by Vasari as
truly astonishing, from its beauty; and Madonnas, chiefly drawn along
with other saints, on oblong canvass; a practice in common use by many
artists of that age, some of whom we have already recounted, and others
are yet to come. But the least informed among people of taste, being
ignorant of their names, the moment they behold a picture between the
dryness of Giovanni Bellini and the softness of Titian, pronounce it to
be a Palma, and this, more particularly, where they find countenances
well rounded and coloured, landscape exhibited with care, and roseate
hues in the drapery, occurring more frequently than any of a more
sanguine dye. In this way Palma is in the mouths of all, while other
artists, also very numerous, are mentioned only in proportion as they
have attached their own names to their productions. One of these,
resembling Palma and Lotto, but slightly known beyond the precincts of
Bergamo and some adjacent cities, is Giovanni Cariani, as to whom Vasari
is altogether silent. One of his pieces, representing our Saviour, along
with several saints, and dated 1514, I have myself seen at Milan, which
appears to have been altogether formed upon the model of Giorgione. If I
mistake not, it is a juvenile production, and when compared with some
others, which I saw at Bergamo, very indifferent in its forms. The most
excellent of any from his hand, is a Virgin, preserved at the Servi,
with a group of beatified spirits, a choir of angels, and other angels
at her feet, engaged in playing upon their harps in concert. It is an
exceedingly graceful production, delightfully ornamented with landscape
and figures in the distance; very tasteful in its tints, which are
blended in a manner equal to the most studied specimens of the two
artists of Bergamo, already mentioned; thus forming with them a
triumvirate, calculated to reflect honour upon any country. It has been
stated by Tassi, that the celebrated Zuccherelli never visited Bergamo,
without returning to admire the beauties of this picture, pronouncing it
one of the finest specimens of the art he had ever beheld, and the best
which that city had to boast. Cariani was also no less distinguished as
a portrait painter, as we gather from a piece belonging to the Counts
Albani, containing various portraits of that noble family; and which,
surrounded with specimens of the best colourists; would almost appear to
be the only one deserving of peculiar admiration.
The city of Trevigi may boast of two artists belonging to the same
class, though widely differing from each other. One of these is Rocco
Marconi, distinguished by Zanetti among some of the best disciples of
Bellini, and erroneously referred by Ridolfi to the school of Palma. He
excelled in accuracy of design, taste of colouring, and diligence of
hand, though not always sufficiently easy in his contours, and for the
most part exhibiting a severity almost approaching to plebeian
coarseness in his countenances. Even in the earliest production
attributed to him, executed in the year 1505, and preserved in the
church of San Niccolo, at Trevigi, Ridolfi detects that peculiar
clearness of style, which may be traced also so strongly in his Three
Apostles, at SS. Giovanni and Paolo, as well as in his few other
pictures dispersed among the public places. Indeed half-length figures
of this artist are by no means of rare occurrence in private
collections, though he can boast no single specimen so beautiful, or so
completely _Giorgionesque_ as his Judgment of the Adulteress, to be seen
in the chapter of San Giorgio Maggiore, and of which there is either a
duplicate or a copy at San Pantaleo, and in other places. The other of
these two artists is Paris Bordone, the elevation of whose mind and
genius seemed to correspond with that of his birth. After having been a
pupil of Titian for a short period, he became an enthusiastic imitator
of Giorgione, finally adopting an originality of manner, whose peculiar
grace bears no resemblance to that of any other painter. His forms may
truly be said to breathe, to glow, and even to laugh, with a force of
colouring, which, incapable of displaying a greater degree of truth than
that of Titian, aimed, nevertheless, at more variety and attraction;
while, at the same time, they were not wanting in delicacy of design,
novelty of drapery, propriety of composition, and a peculiarly lively
air of the heads. In the church of S. Giobbe he produced a picture of S.
Andrew embracing his Cross, with an angel seen hovering above, in the
act of bestowing upon him the crown of martyrdom; while in one of the
two saints, represented at the side, he drew the figure of S. Peter, in
the act of gazing upon him with a kind of envy; an idea equally novel
and picturesque. A similar method he adopted in other of his works,
produced in great part for the ornament of his native place and its
vicinity. Not a subject but is taken from the antique; yet each of them
is treated with originality. Of such kind, is that picture of a true
Paradise, seen in the Ognissanti at Trevigi, and those evangelical
mysteries in the cathedral of the same city, represented in an
altarpiece, divided into six different groups, at the request, it is
presumed, of the person who engaged him to execute it. Here we behold,
assembled in a small space, every thing of the most pleasing and
beautiful kind, which he has elsewhere scattered throughout the whole of
his works. In Venice, his representation of the restoration of the ring
to the Doge by a fisherman, possesses a high reputation; and this,
accompanied with that of the Tempest, shortly before described, by
Giorgione, forms an admirable contrast in its beauty to the terrors
abounding in the latter. Decorated with the finest specimens of
architecture, and a profusion of animated and well adapted figures, as
varied in their actions as in their draperies, it has been commended by
Vasari as the masterpiece of his labours. The same artist is, likewise,
highly prized in collections. Madonnas of his are to be met with,
characterized by the uniformity of their countenance, as well as some of
his portraits, often attired in the manner of Giorgione, and composed
with fine and novel embellishments. Being invited to the court of
Francis II., he acquired the favour of that monarch and of his
successor, thus enriching himself by the exercise of his talents. He had
a son who pursued the same branches of the art; but from his picture of
Daniel, remaining at Santa Maria Formosa in Venice, it is evident how
very inferior he must have been.
At the same time flourished one Girolamo da Trevigi, a different artist
to his namesake already mentioned by us, who, induced probably by the
example of his noble fellow citizen, and turning his attention to a more
select style than the generality of the Venetian School, applied himself
to the models of Raffaello, and the Romans. He is entitled by Padre
Federici, upon the authority of Mauro, Pennacchi, and is considered by
him the son of that Piermaria, of whom we made brief mention before,
(page 62). There is little from his hand remaining at Venice, but more
in Bologna, particularly at San Petronio, where he painted in oil the
histories of S. Antony of Padua, with judgment and grace, combined with
an exquisite degree of polish, which obtained for him the commendation
of Vasari. It was here he happily succeeded in uniting the excellences
of the two schools, though he did not flourish long enough to mature
them, having devoted himself to the military occupation of an engineer,
to which service he fell a victim in 1544, while in England; he was
killed, according to Vasari, in his thirty-sixth year. On this last
point we can scarcely admit the emendation offered us by the author of
the Description of Vicenza, who would substitute for this earlier date
the age of seventy-six years, a period of life when men seldom encounter
their final doom in the field. In this instance, perhaps, the emendator
was not aware that there exist signatures of a Girolamo da Treviso, met
with upon pictures from the year 1472 to that of 1487, uniformly of
ancient design; an artist, who could not, in the common course of life,
have survived to become an excellent disciple of Raffaello, and the
assistant of Pupini at Bologna, about the year 1530. He failed,
therefore, to make a distinction between two painters of the same name,
as it will be perceived we have done, followed by the authority of Padre
Federici.
Finally, in this list must be enumerated Gio. Antonio Licinio, either
Sacchiense, or Cuticello,[44] until such period, as happening to be
wounded in the hand by his brother, he renounced all title to his family
name, assuming the appellation of Regillo. He is commonly, however,
called Pordenone, from his native place, formerly a province, and now a
city of the Friuli. "In this province," it is observed by Vasari, "there
flourished, during his time, a great number of excellent artists, who
had never visited either Florence or Rome; but he stood pre-eminent
above all, surpassing his predecessors in the conception of his pieces,
in design, in boldness, in the use of his colours, in his frescos, in
rapidity, in grandeur of relief; and, indeed, in every other attribute
of the arts." It is uncertain whether he attended the School of
Castelfranco, as it has been supposed by some, and much more so, whether
he was a fellow student along with him and Titian, under Giovanni
Bellini, a supposition started by Rinaldis, (p. 62). To me, the opinion
reported by Ridolfi appears nearer the truth, that having first studied,
in his youth, the productions of Pelligrino, at Udine, he subsequently
adopted the manner of Giorgione, following the bias of his own genius,
invariably the artist's safest guide in the formation of a style. Other
disciples of Giorgione, more or less resembled him in manner, but
Pordenone seemed to vie with him in spirit, a spirit equally daring,
resolute, and great; surpassed by no other, perhaps, in the Venetian
School. Yet in lower Italy he is little known beyond his name. The
picture with the portraits of his family, preserved in the Palazzo
Borghese, is the best production of his that I have met with in these
parts. And elsewhere, indeed, we rarely behold such histories as his
exquisite picture of the Raising of Lazarus, in possession of the Conti
Lecchi, at Brescia. Nor does he abound in altarpieces, beyond the
province of Friuli, which boasts of several in different places, though
not all equally genuine. The few executed in Pordenone, are
unquestionably his, inasmuch as he has himself described them in a
memorial still extant.[45] The collegiate church possesses two of these;
one consisting of a Holy Family, with S. Christopher, executed in 1515,
very finely coloured, but not exempt from some inaccuracies. The other
bears the date of 1535, representing S. Mark in the act of consecrating
a bishop, along with other saints, and with perspective; a piece, says
its author, _posta in opera, non finita_, begun, indeed, but not
finished. A more complete specimen was to be seen at San Pier Martire di
Udine, in his Annunciation, since re-touched and destroyed. Some there
are who have preferred, before every other, that preserved in S. Maria
dell'Orto, at Venice. It consists of San Lorenzo Giustiniani, surrounded
by various saints; among whom S. John the Baptist appears naked
according to the rules of the most learned schools; while the arm of S.
Augustine is seen, as it were, stretched forth out of the picture, an
effect of perspective this artist has repeated in various other places.
The most beautiful of his pieces in Piacenza, where he had established
himself, is his picture of the Marriage of S. Catherine, upon a dark
ground, which gives a roundness to the whole of the figures; it is full
of grace in those of a more tender character, and displays grandeur in
the forms of S. Peter and S. Paul, represented on the two sides; in the
last of whom, as well as in the S. Rocco of Pordenone, he gave a
portrait of himself.
But his works in fresco display the highest degree of merit; great part
of which he produced in the Friuli, besides numerous others scattered
throughout castles and villas, no longer distinguished by strangers,
except from the circumstance of possessing some painting of Pordenone.
Such places are Castions, Valeriano, Villanova, Varmo, Pallazuolo, where
he is with certainty known to have employed his talents. A few remnants
are likewise preserved in Mantua, in the Casa de' Cesarei, and in the
palazzo Doria, at Genoa; some at S. Rocco, and the cloisters of S.
Stefano, in Venice, and many specimens in high preservation in the dome
of Cremona, and at Santa Maria di Campagna, in Piacenza, where, in
collections, and in the facades of houses, other pieces of his are
pointed out. His labours in fresco, however, are not all equally studied
and correct; more particularly those in his native Friuli, which he
produced at an early age in great abundance, and for a small price. He
is more select in his male forms than in those of his women, whose model
he appears to have frequently taken from very robust rather than very
beautiful subjects, most probably met with in the adjacent province of
Carnia, where he is said to have indulged his early passions. But in
every thing he undertook we may invariably trace the workings of a
vigorous fancy, rich in conceiving, in varying, and developing his
ideas; powerful in his exhibition of the passions, displaying the
master-hand that encounters the difficulties of the art with the most
novel combinations in the science of foreshortening, with the most
laboured perspective, and with a power of relief which appears perfectly
starting from the canvass.
In Venice, he seemed to surpass all he had before done. The competition,
or rather enmity subsisting between him and Titian, served as a spur
both by day and night, to actuate him to fresh exertions. He was at
times even accustomed to paint with arms at his side; and it is the
opinion of many, that such emulation was of no less advantage to Titian,
than was the rivalship of Michelangiolo to Raffaello. In this instance,
also, the one excelled in strength, the other in grace of hand; or, as
it has been observed by Zanetti, nature prevailed in Titian in a
superior degree to manner, while in Pordenone both shone with an equal
degree of excellence. To have competed with Titian is a circumstance not
a little honourable to his name, and has acquired for him in the
Venetian School the second rank at least, in a period so prolific in
excellent artists. A portion of the people, indeed, then preferred him
to Titian; for, as I have elsewhere observed, there is nothing so well
calculated to surprise the multitude as the production of fine effect
and of the chiaroscuro, in which art he is known to have first preceded
Guercino. Pordenone was highly favoured, and presented with the title of
cavalier by Charles V.; and being subsequently invited to the court of
Ercole II. duke of Ferrara, he died there shortly after, not without
suspicion of having been poisoned. We have in the next place to give an
account of his school.
Bernardino Licinio, from his surname probably a relation of the
foregoing, was an artist who is here deserving of mention. We gather
from history, as well as from his manner, that he was also a pupil of
Pordenone; and there remains at the Conventuali, in Venice, an
altarpiece of the usual antique composition, quite in the style of the
other Licinio, from his hand. It is reported, likewise, that some of his
portraits are preserved in different collections which have been
erroneously ascribed to the elder Pordenone. Sandrart makes mention of
Giulio Licinio da Pordenone, a nephew and scholar to Gio. Antonio,
adding that he employed himself in Venice; thence transferred his
residence to Augusta, where he left behind him some truly surprising
specimens in fresco, which obtained for him with some a higher
reputation than his uncle. He would appear to be the same Giulio Lizino,
who, in competition with Schiavone, Paul Veronese, and other artists,
produced the three tondi, in the library of St. Mark, in the year 1556.
By Zanetti he is considered of Roman origin,[46] but this is a mistake,
arising from Giulio's having assumed the title of Romano during his
residence in the capital; while he retained it in Venice, the better to
distinguish him from the other _Licinj_, in the same manner as we have
already observed of one of the Trevisani, about the same period.
Giannantonio Licinio the younger, was a brother to Giulio, and more
commonly named Sacchiense, an artist who has been highly commended, but
whose works are no longer to be seen, not even in Como, as far as we can
learn, where he died.
After the Licinj we ought next to record the name of Calderari, a
distinguished pupil of Gio. Antonio, who has succeeded in sometimes
imposing upon the most acute judges. Thus it has occurred in the parish
church of Montereale, where he produced many scripture histories in
fresco, which had been uniformly ascribed to the hand of Pordenone,
until the discovery of a document establishing the contrary. He is even
little known in his native place of Pordenone, and his frescos in the
cathedral were attributed to the pencil of Amalteo. Pordenone may also
boast of another disciple in Francesco Beccaruzzi da Conigliano. For
this we have the authority of Ridolfi, confirmed by the artist's own
work, ornamenting his native place, of St. Francis in the act of
receiving the _stigmata_, or marks of Christ, a figure more striking in
point of relief than of colouring. To the same school has been added by
Orlandi, the name of Gio. Batista Grassi, a good painter, but more
excellent as an architect, and the same from whom Vasari drew his
notices of the painters of Friuli. I should be inclined, however, to
refer him to some other school, both on account of Vasari's silence on a
point so creditable to him, and his resemblance to the manner of Titian
in such of the few pieces as have been well preserved, and are exempt
from modern retouches of art. Of this kind are his pictures of the
Annunciation; the Translation of Elias; and the Vision of Ezekiel, in
the cathedral of Gemona, on the doors of the organ there.
The last name to be enumerated in this class, is that of Pomponio
Amalteo, a native of San Vito, and of a noble family which yet boasts
its descendants at Uderzo. He was one of the most excellent of
Giannantonio's pupils, and introduced his master's style into the
Friuli, for which reason we shall here give him a place, together with
the whole of his followers. He was son-in-law to Pordenone, and the
artist who succeeded him in his school at Friuli. Both there and in
other places he employed himself in works of distinguished merit. He
preserved the manner of his father-in-law, as has been observed by
Ridolfi, who erroneously ascribes to Licinio the Three Judgments,
indisputably the production of Amalteo, which he represented in a
gallery at Ceneda, in which causes are decided. They consist of the
Judgment of Solomon, of that of Daniel, and a third of Trajan; the whole
completed in the year 1536. It is everywhere evident that he aspired to
originality of manner; his shading is less strong, his colours are
brighter, and the proportions of his figures, and all his ideas are upon
a less elevated scale than those of his father-in-law. Some faint idea
of his works may be gathered from Vasari and Ridolfi, who omitted,
however, many of them, among others the five pictures of Roman histories
adorning the Hall of the Notaries at Belluno: but it is only some faint
idea, inasmuch as neither these two writers, nor Altan, who collected
memorials of him in a little work, were at all enabled to do full
justice to the labours of an artist who continued to occupy himself,
assisted by various other hands, until the latest period of his life.
Hence it is that the bulk of his works can by no means boast the same
degree of excellence as the Three Judgments we have mentioned, or the
picture of S. Francis, at the church of that name, in Udine, esteemed
one among the valuable pieces belonging to the city. Still, wherever or
upon whatever subject he employed himself, he displayed the powers of a
great master, educated by Pordenone; and one who not only shewed
himself, with the generality of Venetians, a splendid colourist, but
designed far more accurately. The same merit continued, for some period,
to characterize his successors, who, however, if I mistake not, were
greatly inferior to him in genius; excepting only his brother, with whom
we shall commence the history of Pomponio's School.
His name was Girolamo, and, receiving the instructions of his brother,
he is supposed to have assisted him in his labours, giving proofs of a
noble genius, which he more peculiarly manifested in works of design; in
small pictures, which appeared like miniature, in several fables
executed in fresco, and in an altarpiece which he painted in the church
of San Vito. Ridolfi commends him highly for his spirited manner, and
another of the old writers, as we learn from Rinaldis, gives his
opinion, that if he had flourished for a longer period, he would,
perhaps, have proved no way inferior to the great Pordenone. Hence I
find reason to conclude that Girolamo continued, during life, the
exercise of his art; and that the report transmitted to us through
Ridolfi, about a century after his death, of his brother Pomponio having
devoted him out of jealousy of his genius to mercantile pursuits, as was
certainly the case with a brother of Titian's, must have been wholly
without foundation.
Pomponio likewise availed himself of the aid of Antonio Bosello in the
paintings he produced at Ceneda, as well as for the Patriarch within the
gallery just before recorded, and for the canons in the Organ of the
cathedral. This artist must assuredly have arrived at some degree of
perfection, inasmuch as we are in possession of the particulars of
various salaries paid to him, distinct from such as were paid to the
principal. As I find mention in Bergamo of an Antonio Boselli, memorials
of whom subsist there between the period of 1509 and that of 1527, it is
extremely probable that he was the same painter, who, being unable to
contend with the fame of Lotto, and so many other of his contemporaries
in that celebrated school, sought for better fort
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/34645