Chapter IX: Book I: Venetian School (8)

It is here the place to inform our readers, that the various styles, hitherto described as attaching to the Venetian School, do not comprehend all that flourished in the state. Ridolfi remarks this in his preface, and laments, that owing to the conflagrations occurring in the city, or by the neglect of writers, not a few materials had perished, that might have added interest to his history. In truth, he was not merely ignorant of several of the more ancient artists, but in the period we are describing omitted the names of Jacopo Fallaro and Jacopo Pisbolica, whom Vasari, in his Life of Sansovino, records with praise, citing from the hand of the former a picture of San Gio. Colombino, at the Domenicani delle Zattere; and of the latter, his Ascension of Christ at Santa Maria Maggiore. He likewise passed over Vitrulio, several of whose productions are the ornament of Monte Novissimo, bearing his name. These artists, judging from their manner and other points, are to be referred to the age of Titian. Ridolfi made mention, and more at length, of another, who, exactly contemporary with Paul, continued to flourish many years after him, but always assailed by fortune; and though a good colourist, being greatly deficient in point of invention and design. His name was Antonio Foler; and, as a convincing proof of his mediocrity, it will be sufficient to allude to his Martyrdom of St. Stephen, at the church of that name; it is nevertheless, one of his best altarpieces. In small figures, however, he appears to have had merit.

Before concluding the present epoch, it will be proper to mention two painters; one a foreigner, the other a Venetian, both of whom followed a style altogether different from such as we have already described. The artist of Venice is Batista Franco, called Semolei. He has been treated of in the first volume in several parts, and especially in what relates to Baroccio, to whom he was master. He pursued his studies in Rome, and so great was his progress in the art of design, that he was accounted one of the best imitators of Michel Angiolo. In ornamenting San Gio. Decollato, a church belonging to the Florentines in Rome, he appears to have been ambitious of making a parade of his powers, and his style became somewhat loaded in the attempt. In his other pictures which I have seen in the dome at Urbino, and in that of Osimo, where he painted in 1547, in Bologna, and in Venice, I have not met with any thing similar. He invariably appears to have been an able follower of Michel Angiolo, and a more powerful colourist than the chief part of the Florentine artists. It is easier to become acquainted with him in the States of the Church than in his native city of Venice, whither he seems to have retired towards the close of his days, since, in 1556, he was among the artists selected to adorn the library of St. Mark. There he represented his fable of Actaeon, along with several symbolical inventions; and a few other of his pictures are exhibited there in public. He died not long subsequently in the year 1561.

The foreign artist is Giuseppe Porta della Garfagnana, already mentioned, likewise, under the Roman School, in which he was instructed by Francesco Salviati, whose surname he assumed. For this reason he is sometimes entitled in history Salviati the younger. He accompanied his master to Venice, on the latter being invited by the Patriarch Grimani to embellish his palace, where he produced his celebrated Psyche, still to be seen there, near two pictures by the hand of Porta. Francesco, however, soon left Venice; Vasari adducing as a very sufficient reason, that it was no place for the residence of artists distinguished for excellence in design. But the success of Porta, who became established and died at Venice, clearly proves the contrary. Initiated in a knowledge of design by Francesco, he wholly retained the character of the Florentine School, only enlivening it with tints in the Venetian taste. Nevertheless, he was approved by Titian, and selected along with Paul and other leading names to paint in the library of St. Mark; he was continually engaged to work in fresco and in oil, both in public and in private; and was always distinguished there as one of the most able masters of his age.[74] Several of his altarpieces remain, and among others one of the Assumption; a beautiful piece, at the Servi, in Venice, besides a Christ taken from the Cross, at Murano, displaying powers of invention wholly original, full of expression, and an air of majesty not very usual in this school. He repeated the same subject frequently; and there was a duplicate in the Ducal collection at Modena, subsequently transferred to Dresden.

Following these artists, the reader must not be surprised to meet with the name of Jacopo Sansovino, who, as will appear from the index, derived his surname also from his master. He was much courted in Venice, owing to his excellence in the art of statuary, as well as in that of an architect, with which he ornamented public places. Still he failed not to exercise some influence over that of painting, at least of design; in which he had been well instructed by Andrea del Sarto, in Florence. Indeed, as the director of the edifice of St. Mark, numerous artists were dependent upon him; and it is known, that he received some commissions for designs in mosaic work, which I do not, however, find particularized; as well as others, most probably, in tapestry, for the altar of the sacrament, as it has been conjectured from their style, by Signor Zanetti. In regard to foreign styles, we must proceed, without dwelling upon the Cavalier Zuccaro, Passignano, and others already treated in their respective schools, to make brief mention of Giuseppe Calimberg, or Calimperg, by birth a German, who flourished a considerable time at Venice, where he died about 1570. There is the Battle of Constantine, by his hand, still preserved at the Servi; and had he always displayed the same taste, I should not scruple to pronounce him excellent, though somewhat heavy, in the practice of his art. Subsequent to him appears to have flourished Gio. de Chere Loranese, who ought to be mentioned, before we proceed to treat of the sect of mannerists, and of the _Tenebrosi_.[75] Ranking among the scholars of the best Venetian masters, he produced a history piece for the grand council hall. Other names of foreign artists are to be looked for in the Guida: it is my object in this school, as in the rest, to record only such as are most deserving of commemoration.

In the progress of the present history, the reader may probably have observed, that no distinction had yet been made between certain species of painting, previous to the sixteenth century. The figurist copied every thing, and availed himself of every thing to adorn his compositions; landscapes, animals, fruits, flowers, and perspective, were all employed as accessaries in favour of the leading art; the execution of which was about as difficult to the great masters as the throne of Jupiter to Phidias, after having completed the figure of the god. By degrees, however, they began to separate, and to treat these parts of painting severally. The Flemish were among the first, who, pursuing the bent of their genius, selected the respective branches, and composed pictures, in which, landscape for example, became the principal object, while the figure in its turn became an accessary. And we may here remark, with Bellori, that "the best of these artists dipped their pencil in those fine Venetian colours;" by no means one of the least boasts of the Venetian School. The Italians, likewise, attended severally to these branches of the art, and in particular to landscapes. It was Titian who opened the true path to our landscape painters; although nearly the whole of his champaign scenery was introduced in aid of his figures; never the contrary. One of these, consisting of a Holy Family, was in possession of the Duchess of Massa and Carrara, lately deceased, who left it as a legacy to the Prince Carlo Albani, of Milan. It is one of the most beautiful of the kind I ever saw. Titian was imitated by many Flemish artists; and among the Venetians by Gio. Maria Verdizzotti, one of his literary friends, who painted under his direction several landscapes, much esteemed in different collections, where they are rarely to be seen.

The Bassani produced examples of small pictures of quadrupeds and birds, which consisting of copies taken from those seen in their histories, are easily recognized. They are not so numerous, however, as their history pieces; nor do I recollect having seen specimens of them except in the Venetian state. In drawing fish, an artist of the name of Genzio or Gennesio Liberale, a native of Friuli, has been mentioned with praise by Vasari, and afterwards by Ridolfi.

A taste for grotesque, was introduced into Venice from Rome, by a citizen of the republic, recorded by me elsewhere as the master of this kind of art. His name was Morto da Feltro, who, in the company of Giorgione, employed himself in Venice, though without leaving any traces of his hand. There are specimens of grotesque, in the Ducal Palace, painted by Batista Franco, who had likewise beheld ancient examples of them at Rome. There were others painted for the Patriarch of Aquileja, his patron, by Giovanni di Udine, mentioned by Vasari under the names of Manni and Ricamatore; an artist very celebrated in his line, and almost unique in drawing every kind of birds, quadrupeds, fruits, and flowers. I have included him in the school of Giorgione; and he is stated more at length in that of Raffaello; for he remained but little while with his first master, and in Upper Italy; but longer in Rome, and during some time in Florence. His pictures of birds, or fruits, executed in oil, are pointed out in different collections, though, if I mistake not, they are not all genuine. It is not, indeed, that he produced no specimens in oil, although it is extremely difficult to discover any that are certain; nor that he was incapable of drawing larger figures than such as we see in his satyrs, in his boys, and nymphs, with which he diversified the little landscapes and the tracery of his grotesques. Vasari mentions some of his standards, one of which, executed in Udine, for the Fraternity of Castello, presents in rather large proportions, a blessed virgin with the divine child, and an angel making her an offering of the same castle. The original, though much defaced, still exists, and there is also a copy in the chapel, executed by Pini in 1653. There likewise remains in the archiepiscopal palace, a chamber containing, among some grotesques, two scriptural histories, drawn in half-length figures, not so perfect as the ornamental part, but valuable from their rarity. His other productions, both in Udine and the state, have been enumerated in a learned letter written by the Ab. Boni, upon the standard or gonfalone, just described. If we might hazard a conjecture relative to the school of Giovanni and of Feltro, we should be inclined to give for a pupil to one of these, Giorgio Bellunese, an artist, as we are informed by Cesarini, "_very excellent in friezes and in minute ornaments_," and moreover an able portrait painter. He flourished at San Vito, a place in the Friuli, about the middle of the sixteenth century; so that the time, the place, and his employment in ornamental work, seem equally to favour our opinion.

The art of architectural design received great assistance in Venice during this period, from the works of Sansovino, Palladio, and other consummate architects, who gave finished examples of magnificent edifices; while Daniel Barbaro composed very useful treatises upon perspective; and it became an attribute of the art to feign colonnades, galleries, and rich cornices, for those halls in which real architecture would not admit of them. In this, Cristoforo and Stefano Rosa more particularly distinguished themselves. They were from Brescia, very intimate with Titian, and merited the honour of being employed by him, in his architectural ornaments for several of his pieces. In Brescia, in Venice, and particularly in the anti-chamber to the library of S. Mark, we may meet with some of their perspectives, so admirably executed as to surprise us by their air of majesty, cheating the eye by their relief; and when beheld in different points of view, always producing a good effect. Their school continued to flourish during many years, in their native state; and was subsequently supported by Bona, excellent also in figures, as well as by other artists. Boschini bestows many commendations upon it in different parts of his work in verse; and in particular at p. 225, where he declares, that Brescia was the source of this art; which applies of course to the Venetian state.

Finally, the art of mosaic work, in stone and coloured glass, at that time, attained such a degree of perfection in Venice, that Vasari observed with surprise, "that it would not be possible to effect more with colours."[76] The church and portico of S. Mark remains an invaluable museum of the kind; where, commencing with the eleventh century, we may trace the gradual progress of design belonging to each age up to the present, as exhibited in many works in mosaic, beginning from the Greeks, and continued by the Italians. They chiefly consist of histories from the Old and New Testament, and at the same time furnish very interesting notices relating to civic and ecclesiastical antiquity. A portion of the most ancient specimens had long either perished, or fallen into decay, and it had been resolved to substitute fresh ones in their place. It is not improbable, that after the year 1400, upon the revival of painting, a desire prevailed to banish the taste of the Greeks; and certain it is, that in the mosaics of that age we meet with the modern antique style, the same as in regard to pictures. It will be enough to cite the chapel of the _Mascoli_, decorated by Michele Zambono with histories of the life of the virgin, executed with extraordinary care, and designed in the best taste of the Vivarini.

The same taste prevailed in the time of Titian; and to this he gave a renewed spirit, and even furnished several of these artists with designs. Marco Luciano Rizzo and Vincenzo Bianchini are the first, who, about 1517, succeeded in a complete reform of the art. To the last is referred that celebrated Judgment of Solomon, which adorns the portico, or vestibule. Both these, however, were surpassed by Francesco and Valerio Zuccati of Treviso, or rather of the Valtelline, sons of the same Sebastian who initiated Titian in the first rudiments of the art. Of these, likewise, there appears in the portico a San Marco, among various prophets and doctors, and with two histories that may be pronounced the best mosaic works, produced during the age of painting. I have seen altarpieces for churches, and pictures for private ornament, in the same taste. The Royal Gallery at Florence possesses a portrait from life of Cardinal Bembo, worked by Valerio; and a San Girolamo, by Francesco, is known to have been presented by the republic to the court of Savoy. Subsequent to these, whom Vasari erroneously calls sometimes Zuccheri, sometimes Zuccherini, Arminio, a son of Valerio, was in much repute. Nor did this family only possess the art of colouring stone and glass with admirable skill; but they understood the principles of design, more particularly Francesco, who had been a painter before entering upon mosaic works. The family of Bianchini, and the other artists then employed at S. Mark, were not equally well instructed; and, stimulated by feelings of envy, they declared open enmity against the Zuccati, for having assisted with the brush to supply some parts of the design to be executed in mosaic; nor did they fail to cry down the ability of Valerio, to whom it would appear that Titian and his son afforded succour. It would be tedious here to relate the various persecutions, litigations, and losses, owing to this quarrel; the particulars of which were extracted by Zanetti from authentic documents, and minutely described. Enough, that he concludes with extolling the Zuccati, together with Vincenzio Bianchini; to whom, as being acquainted with design, it was sufficient to furnish a rough draught for the intended work. Others were, for the most part, in want of cartoons, and complete paintings, in order to model their mosaic works, and even then they conducted them with skill much inferior to their predecessors. In this list he computes Domenico, the brother, and Gio. Antonio, the son of Vincenzio Bianchini, as well as Bartolommeo Bozza, at one time a pupil, and then an accuser along with the rest, of the Zuccati. In the time of these were first adopted, and practically applied, the works and designs of Salviati and of Tintoretto. The names succeeding these, were Gio. Antonio Marini, a pupil of Bozza, and Lorenzo Ceccato, both admirable artificers; Luigi Gaetano and Jacopo Pasterini, with Francesco Turestio, notices of whom are brought up to the year 1618. They worked after the cartoons of the two Tintoretti, of Palma the younger, of Maffeo Verona, of Leandro Bassano, of Aliense, of Padovanino, of Tizianello, besides several others. About the year 1600 commenced a series of artists less generally known; a list of whose works may be consulted at the close of that very valuable publication, "_Della Pittura Veneziana_." These last, however, have confined their labours to the decoration of new walls, from modern designs; as since 1610, a decree has been in force against the destruction of ancient mosaic works, in however rude or Greekish a taste; but in case of impending destruction, they were to be removed and restored with care, and afterwards refixed in the same place. By this measure a series of monuments is preserved to posterity, which, in its kind, is quite unique in Italy, and the world.

[Footnote 41: It is related by Vasari, that Titian was in the habit of painting natural objects from the life, without making any previous design, "a practice adopted for many years by the Venetian painters, by Giorgione, by Palma, by Pordenone, and others who never visited Rome, nor studied other specimens of greater perfection than their own." I know not how far the above writer was acquainted with their method. But their designs are still extant in various collections; and the Cartoon of the celebrated S. Agostino, painted by Pordenone in that city, is now in possession of the Count Chiappini in Piacenza, in good condition.]

[Footnote 42: I made mention elsewhere of P. Federici's supposition, as being at least probable, that F. Sebastiano was the same person as F. Marco Pensaben, a Dominican. The year of their birth is certainly the same. But other dates are too discordant; if, indeed, we are not to suppose that the whole of what Vasari has written of Sebastiano, in his life of him, as well as in those of Sanzio and Peruzzi, is merely fanciful. It is by no means worth our while to draw minute comparisons between the epochs of these two painters. In 1520, we found Pensaben in Venice; next at Trevigi, where he remained till July, 1521. Now Sebastiano, the Venetian, was, at this very period, at Rome. The Car. Giulio de'Medici had committed to Raffaello the picture of the _Transfiguration_, which having hardly completed, that artist died on Good Friday, 1520; and during the same time, as if in competition with Raffaello, Sebastiano was employed in painting the Resurrection of Lazarus, for the same Cardinal, which, soon after, was exhibited along with the Transfiguration, and then sent into France. More still--he likewise drew the Martyrdom of Santa Agata, for the Cardinal of Aragona; a piece which, in the time of Vasari, was in possession of the Duke of Urbino; then in the Palazzo Pitti at Florence, whence it passed into France. There is the name of _Sebastianus Venetus_, and the year 1520 affixed to it. This artist therefore can, by no means, be confounded with F. Marco, nor the painting of this last at Trevigi be ascribed to the former. Such a mistaken opinion has been attributed to me by the learned P. Federici; (vol. i. p. 120) but on what ground I know not.]

[Footnote 43: We confess our obligations to Sig. Giuseppe Beltramelli, who informs us, in a work published in 1806, that this painter, generally supposed from Bergamo, was really a Venetian, being thus mentioned in a public contract: _M. Laurentius Lottus de Venetiis nunc habitator Bergomi_. Father Federici, who, on the strength of some historian, pronounces him of Trevigi, brings forward another document in which Lotto is called: _D. Laurentii Lotti pictoris, et de presenti Tarvisii commorantis_. If, therefore, _habitator Bergomi_ does not prove him a native of Bergamo, will the words _Tarvisii commorantis_ make him a native of Trevigi? But Father Affo, in one of his earliest pictures, found him entitled _Tarvisinus_. Who, however, can assure us that it is in fact the handwriting of Lotto, which he there found written?]

[Footnote 44: Thus called by the oldest writers, though, from his father's testament, recently brought to light, it appears to be erroneous. Here his father is entitled, _Angelus de Lodesanis de Corticellis_, (or in a MS. of the Signori Mottensi of Pordenone _de Corticelsis Brixiensis_).]

[Footnote 45: It is inserted in a _Transunto_ of MSS. belonging to the noble Ernesto Mottensi of Pordenone, communicated to me by the P. D. Michele Turriani Barnabita, extremely skilled in the parchments and ancient memorials of Friuli.]

[Footnote 46: See his work on Venetian Painting, p. 250.]

[Footnote 47: By means of Sig. Ab. Gei, of Cadore, a young man of the most promising abilities, I have obtained notice of an artist belonging to that place, who, from various authorities, is supposed to have been the instructor of the great Titian. It is certain he flourished towards the close of the fifteenth century; nor does there exist accounts of any other artist of Cadore, capable of initiating his countrymen in a knowledge of the art. Three of his pictures in water colours, in the usual style of composition at that time, so frequently described, are yet extant; the first, a fine altarpiece, adorning the parish church at Selva, in which the titular S. Lorenzo, with others, in an upright posture, are seen surrounding the throne of the Virgin; a second, of smaller size, is in the Oratory of Sig. Antonio Zamberlani, in the parish church of Cadore, where the throne appears encompassed with cherubs playing upon instruments; the third, placed at San Bartolommeo of Nabiu, is divided into six compartments; the best, or at least the most free from harshness of manner of the whole. It is inferior, however, in design to Jacopo Bellini, though equal, perhaps, in point of diligence and colouring, and similar in its style. Upon the first he has inscribed, _Antonius RUBEUS de Cadubrio pinxit_; upon the second, _Opus Antonii_ RUBEI: but the letter E being defaced, the word looks like RUBLI; upon the third is found _Antonius Zaudanus_ (da Zoldo) _pinxit_. Thus if we combine these inscriptions it will appear that this ancient painter, whom we now place at the head of the artists belonging to that prolific clime, was Antonio Rossi Cadorino.]

[Footnote 48: See Ridolfi. This picture is now in Dresden, and Italy abounds with copies. One of these I saw at S. Saverio di Rimini, inscribed with the name of Titian on the band of the Pharisee, a very beautiful production, and believed by many to be a duplicate rather than a copy. Albert was in Italy in 1495 and in 1506. In Venice, one of his pictures, in the council of the Ten, is cited by Zanetti; it is Jesus Christ shewn to the people; and an altarpiece is also mentioned by Sansovino, placed at S. Bartolommeo, commended both by him and by other writers. (See the Sig. Morelli's Annotations on the _Notizia_, p. 223.)]

[Footnote 49: Opere, tome i. p. 177.]

[Footnote 50: See his Life of Titian.]

[Footnote 51: See Bottari, Notes to Vasari, in the Life of Titian.]

[Footnote 52: See _Idea della Pittura, Edizione Rom._ p. 287.]

[Footnote 53: See Passeri.]

[Footnote 54: On the Arts of Design, Discourse, &c.]

[Footnote 55: He drew his head of San Niccolo a' Frari from a cast of the Laocoon; and from other models of the antique, that of S. John the Baptist, and of the Magdalen of Spain. From a Greek basso relievo he likewise copied the angels of his S. Peter Martyr. The same artist drew the Cesars, at Mantua, a work very highly commended, and impossible to have been so well executed without a knowledge of ancient sculpture, of which there yet exists a fine collection at Mantua. But what he drew from the antique, he also inspired with nature, the sole method of profiting by it, when a painter aspires to a higher character than that of a mere statuary. See Ridolfi, p. 171.]

[Footnote 56: Lamberto Lombardo, of Liege, is the artist whose life was written in Latin, by his disciple Golzio, a work edited in Bruges in 1565. In his youth he adopted the surname of Suterman, or Susterman, in the Latin tongue _Suavis_, and having likewise been an excellent engraver, his signature was sometimes L. L., at others, L. S. The whole of this account is to be met with in Orlandi, and other books. Yet Orlandi and the new Guide of Padua, acknowledge another Lamberti, also surnamed Suster, upon the authority of Sandrart, who mentions him, p. 224. According to Orlandi, this artist was the assistant to Titian and Tintoret, by whom he is first recorded as Lamberto Suster, and again as Lamberto Tedesco. The same author mentions a Federigo di Lamberto, whose name occurs in our first volume, (p. 268), likewise called del Padovano and _Sustris_, certainly from _Suster_, for which see Vasari and his annotators. These Lamberti, founded upon the diversity between the Liege and German names of Susterman and Suster, received upon the authority of Sandrart, not always very critical, are, I have reason to think, one and the same artist. For in Venice one Lamberto only is alluded to by Ridolfi, Boschini, and Zanetti, without a surname, but by the last held to be the same as Lombardo; and what signifies it, whether he was called Suster or Susterman, of Germany, or of Liege, in Italy.]

[Footnote 57: He is called by Vasari, Zanetti, and Guarienti, Bazzacco and Brazzacco da Castelfranco, and Guarienti makes him a scholar of Badile.]

[Footnote 58: They consist only of a few pages relating to the painters of Castelfranco. I cannot explain why Padre Federici (Pref. p. 17) supposes that I should have announced this as the MS. Melchiori, although Sig. Trevisani may have drawn various notices from that quarter.]

[Footnote 59: Padre Coronelli, in his Travels in England, (part i. p. 66), ascribes this picture to Paul Veronese, a mistake that is cleared up by the tenor of the contract, preserved in the archives of San Liberale. He adds that the picture contained a number of naked figures, to which draperies were afterwards adapted by another hand--an assertion wholly groundless.]

[Footnote 60: In a MS. by a contemporary author cited in the new Guide of Padua, he is called Domenico Veneziano, educated by Julio Campagnola.]

[Footnote 61: Thus stated in the _Lettere Pittoriche_, vol. i. p. 248. Recent writers of Friuli make him a native of Udine, a modern supposition, inasmuch as Grassi, a very diligent correspondent of Vasari, would hardly have been silent upon such a name. It took its rise, most likely, from the existence of a noble family of the same surname, in Udine, and from three of the artist's pictures having been discovered in the same place, one with the date 1595. Yet none are to be seen at Casa Frangipane, a circumstance very unusual in regard to excellent artists. We must look, therefore, for other proofs before we can pronounce him a native of Udine, and before we can assent to the conjecture of Rinaldis, who would admit two artists of the name of Niccolo Frangipane, the one a painter by profession, and the other a dilettante; and yet contemporaries, as appears from the authority of the dates of the pictures, already referred to.]

[Footnote 62: This fact cannot easily be refuted, in the manner attempted by Zaist, in his "Historical Notices of the Cremonese Painters," with true party zeal, p. 162. (See the New Guide of Milan, p. 139.)]

[Footnote 63: To these the name of _Francesco da Milano_ has recently been added, on the strength of an altarpiece, quite _Titianesque_, exhibited with his name in the parish church of Soligo, to which is added the date of 1540:--time may probably clear up the mystery of this.]

[Footnote 64: He flourished several years subsequent, as appears from the _New Milan Guide_, with MS. corrections, by Signor Bianconi, of which the Cavalier Lazara has a copy. He there remarks that he had seen in the greater monastery, now suppressed, belonging to the nuns of San Maurizio, other paintings by Piazza; as Washing the Disciples' feet, in the Refectory, and the Multiplication of Loaves, upon canvass. Also within the interior church, among other scriptural stories in fresco, is found, the Adoration of the Magi, the Marriage of Cana, and the Baptism of Christ, bearing the date of 1556.]

[Footnote 65: Zanetti, p. 147. See also Ridolfi, parte ii. p. 10, where he informs us that Tintoret, in the maturity of his powers, being employed in painting for the church of La Trinita, Adam and Eve seduced by the Serpent, and the Death of Abel, "designed the figures from nature, placing over them a thin veil. To which figures he added a peculiar grace of contours, which he acquired from studying relievi."]

[Footnote 66: This date is pointed out by Boschini, and corresponds with the fortieth year of the artist, who, on the authority of Melchiori, made a noble copy of Giorgione's San Liberale, at Castelfranco, besides producing several original works in his native place and the vicinity. Specimens of his labours exist in water colours, taken from pictures in fresco executed by Paolo and by Zelotti, in different palaces belonging to Venetian noblemen. The cavalier Liberi, his Venetian master, aware of his singular talent for such species of painting, often employed him, to the no small advantage both of his art and his fortune.]

[Footnote 67: It would be too difficult to attempt to enumerate the names of his foreign imitators, particularly the Flemish, who were much devoted to his style, some of whose copies I have seen in collections believed to be originals. But the handle of their pencil, the clearness of colouring, and sometimes, the diminution of the figures, not common to the Bassani, afford means to distinguish them; not however with such a degree of certainty, but that connoisseurs themselves are of different opinions. This occurred in my own time at Rome, respecting a fine picture of the Nativity of Jesus Christ, in the Rezzonico collection. One of the best imitators of that style was David Teniers, who, by his exquisite skill acquired the surname of Bassano. To him I am happy to add another foreigner, Pietro Orrente di Murcia, whom Spanish writers give as a pupil to Jacopo; and were there no other authority, we might upon that of Sig. Conca, receive him as his very exact imitator. In his two pictures referred to (vol. i. p. 266) he is pronounced superior to the Bassani, meaning, perhaps, superior to the sons of Jacopo; it would be too absurd a proposition to prefer him to the head of the school.]

[Footnote 68: It is, as I am informed by Signor dalla Rosa, a picture of the Pentacost.]

[Footnote 69: He attained this effect by drawing these figures with rather bold contours, and the other parts after his works were completed. Owing to his knowledge, as well as his felicity and grace of hand, they are not in the least disagreeable to those who observe them near. (_Zanetti_, p. 181.)]

[Footnote 70: This was easily produced by his rapidity of execution, by which his tints always remained clear and simple. The artist who repeats his touches frequently, and uses much research, can with difficulty preserve freshness, to obtain which another method must undoubtedly be pursued. (_Zanetti_, p. 163.)]

[Footnote 71: It has been stated in his defence, that had he clothed the whole of his figures with those tunics and ancient mantles, he would have become monotonous, and consequently uninteresting in his great history pieces. But I am of opinion, that whoever is familiar with ancient statues and bassi relievi, will find means of varying his compositions. The Cavalier Canova has recently produced two bassi relievi, on the condemnation of Socrates. The Greek vests are two, the tunic and pallium; yet these are finely varied, though there are a number of spectators.]

[Footnote 72: According to Ridolfi, however, he is said to have attained his twenty-sixth year; but certainly not more.]

[Footnote 73: Father Federici has, in the course of this year, 1803, brought to light another scholar of Paul, and afterwards of Carletto, born, like Parrasio, in Venice. He calls him Giacomo Lauro, and Giacomo da Trevigi, because, having established himself in that city, with his family, while still a youth, no one could distinguish him by any other patronymic than that of Trevigiano. Thus speak several anonymous contemporaries, from whose MSS. the reverend father has extracted no slight information relative to the pictures executed by Lauro in his new country. There he enjoyed the friendship of the fathers of San Domenico, for whose church he painted his celebrated picture of St. Rocco, in which he exhibited, with great tragic power, the terrific scourge of the plague. It is honourable to this artist, who died young, that this altarpiece, as well as his other pictures, both in oil and in fresco, have, until lately, been attributed either to Paul or to Carlo, or to some less celebrated hands, but always to good and experienced artists.]

[Footnote 74: See Boschini, Carta, p. 160. Zanetti, p. 494.]

[Footnote 75: A class of artists so called, from their excessive use of deep shades and dark colours. _Tr._]

[Footnote 76: There was an attempt to revive it, made in Florence. Roscoe, in his "Life of Lorenzo de' Medici," (vol. ii. p. 220, 6th ed.) relates, that, with Gherardo, Lorenzo associated Domenico Ghirlandajo to work in mosaic at the chapel of San Zenobio: but that this undertaking, so admirably begun, was interrupted by Lorenzo's death; insomuch that "his attempts," observes the historian, "were thus in a great degree frustrated." This honour appeared to be reserved for Venice.]

VENETIAN SCHOOL.

THIRD EPOCH.

_Innovations of the Mannerists of the Seventeenth Century.
Corruption of Venetian Painting._

A sort of fatality seems to prevail in all human things, rendering their duration in the same state of short continuance; so that after attaining their highest elevation, we may assuredly at no distant period look for their decline. The glory of precedency, of whatever kind, will not long remain the boast of one place, or in possession of a single nation. It migrates from country to country; and the people that yesterday received laws from another, will tomorrow impose them. Those who today are the instructors of a nation, will tomorrow become ambitious of being admitted in the number of its disciples. Numerous examples might be adduced in support of this proposition, but it would be quite superfluous. For whoever is even slightly acquainted with civil or literary history, whoever has observed the passing events of the age in which we live, will easily furnish himself with proofs, without the aid of writers to direct him. We have already traced the same revolution of affairs in the art of painting, in the two schools of Rome and Florence, which, arriving at the zenith of their fame, fell into decay precisely at the period when that of Venice began to exalt itself. And we shall now perceive the decline of the latter, during the same age in which the Florentine began to revive, in which the school of Bologna acquired its highest degree of reputation; and what is still more surprising, seemed to rise by studying the models of the Venetian. So indeed it was: the Caracci were much devoted to Titian, to Giorgione, to Paul Veronese, and Tintoretto, and thence formed styles, and produced pupils that conferred honour upon the whole of the seventeenth century. The Venetians, too, studied the same examples, and derived from them a certain mannerism reprehensible enough in them, but much more so in their disciples. These, devoting themselves in their first studies to more classical artists, and attaining a certain practice both in design and colouring, next aimed at displaying upon a grand scale, figures, not so much taken from life, as from engravings and pictures, or from their own imaginations; and the more rapidly these were executed, the better did they suppose they had succeeded. I am inclined to believe, that the examples of Tintoretto proved, in this respect, more prejudicial than useful. Few were ambitious of emulating his profound knowledge, which in some measure serves to veil his defects; but his haste, his carelessness, and his grounds, they more willingly adopted; while his great name was advanced as a shield to cover their own faults. And the earliest of these, not yet unmindful of the maxims of a better age, did not rush blindly into all these errors and excesses; but by their superiority of spirit, and by their tints, maintained their ground better than the mannerists of the Roman and Florentine styles. But to these succeeded others, whose schools degenerated still more from the ancient rules of art. We advance this without meaning the least imputation upon really good artists, who flourished even during this period; for an age rarely occurs in which good sense becomes altogether extinct. Even during the barbarity of the dark ages, we meet with specimens of some marble busts of the Caesars, and some of their medals, which approach a better taste; and thus also in the age we are describing appeared geniuses, who either wholly, or in great measure, kept themselves free from the general infection; "et tenuere animum contra sua saecula rectum." _Propert._

Jacopo Palma the younger, so called to distinguish him from the other Palma, his great uncle, was an artist who might equally be entitled the last of the good age, and the first of the bad. Born in 1544, after receiving the instructions of his father Antonio, a painter of a confined genius, he exercised himself in copying from Titian, and the best of the national artists. At the age of fifteen years he was taken under the patronage of the Duke of Urbino, and accompanied him to his capital. He afterwards spent eight years in Rome, where he laid a good foundation for his profession, by designing from the antique, copying Michelangiolo and Raffaello; and, in particular, by studying the chiaroscuros of Polidoro. This last was his great model, and next to him came Tintoretto; he being naturally inclined, like them, to animate his figures with a certain freedom of action, and a spirit peculiarly their own. On his return to Venice, he distinguished himself by several works, conducted with singular care and diligence; nor are there wanting professors who have bestowed on him a very high degree of praise, for displaying the excellent maxims of the Roman, united to what was best in the Venetian School. It is observed by Zanetti, that some of his productions were attributed by professors to the hand of Giuseppe del Salviati, whose merit, in point of design and solidity of style, has been already noticed. The whole of these are executed with peculiar facility, a dangerous gift both in painting and in poetry, which this artist possessed in a remarkable degree. Though he made the greatest exertions to bring himself into notice, he was little employed; the post was already occupied by men of consummate ability, by Tintoretto and Paul Veronese; and these monopolized all the most lucrative commissions. Palma, however, obtained the rank of third; chiefly by means of Vittoria, a distinguished sculptor and architect; whose opinion was adopted in the distribution of the labours even of artists themselves. Displeased at the little deference shewn him by Robusti and Paul, he began to encourage Palma, and to assist him also with his advice, so that he shortly acquired a name. We have related a similar instance in regard to Bernini, who brought forward Cortona against Sacchi, at Rome, besides several more, productive of the greatest detriment to the art. So true it is that the same passions prevail in every age, every where pursue the same track, and produce the same results.

Nor was it long before Palma, overwhelmed with commissions, remitted much of his former diligence. In progress of time, he became even yet more careless, until upon the death of his eldest rivals, including Corona, who in his latest works had begun to surpass him, free from competition he asserted unquestioned sway, and despatched his pieces rapidly. His pictures, indeed, might often be pronounced rough draughts, a title bestowed upon them in ridicule by the Cavalier d'Arpino. In order to prevail upon him to produce a piece worthy of his name, it became requisite, not only to allow him the full time he pleased, but the full price he chose to ask, without further reference, except to his own discretion, in which truly he did not greatly abound. Upon such terms he executed that fine picture of San Benedetto, at the church of SS. Cosmo and Damiano, for the noble family of Moro. It resembled many of those he had produced in his best days at Venice, and in particular that celebrated naval battle of Francesco Bembo, placed in the Palazzo Pubblico. Other valuable specimens are found scattered elsewhere, in part mentioned by Ridolfi, and in part unknown to him. Such are his Santa Apollonia, at Cremona, his San Ubaldo and his Nunziata, at Pesaro, and his Invenzione della Croce, at Urbino, a piece abounding in figures, and full of beauty, variety, and expression. His tints are fresh, sweet, and clear, less splendid than those of Paul, but more pleasing than in Tintoretto; and though scantily applied, they are more durable than those of certain foreign pictures more heavily laid on. In the animation of his figures he approaches the two preceding artists, particularly in his more studied works, as he has shewn in his Chastisement of the Serpents, a picture that seems embued with horror. In every other instance he has always sufficient art to please; and it is surprising how a man who led the way to the most corrupt period in Venice, as it has been observed of Vasari at Florence, and of Zuccaro at Rome, could thus exhibit so many attractions, both of nature and of art, calculated to feast the eye, and to fix the soul of the spectator. Both Guercino and Guido were sensible of the power of his pencil; and when examining one of his altarpieces, at the Cappucini, in Bologna, "What a pity," they exclaimed, "that the master of such a pencil should be no more." (Boschini, p. 383.)

In observance of my plan of accompanying each master with his train of followers, I set out with Marco Boschini, a Venetian, who flourished during this same deterioration of a nobler age. He was a pupil to Palma, and has left some memorials of the different professors of the third epoch, not to be met with in any other work. Professing the art of engraving, rather than that of painting, he had, nevertheless, so much merit in the latter, as to approach the manner of Palma, in his picture of the Supper of our Lord, in the Sacristy of San Girolamo; as well as that of Tintoretto, as we gather from a few of his altarpieces in the territory of Padua, and his pictures for private ornament, remaining at Venice, at least as far as I can learn. He was the author of several works recorded in the preface to this work, the most remarkable of which is composed in Quartine, with the following title; and, by this production, he is perhaps best known: "The Chart of pictorial Navigation, a Dialogue between a Venetian senator (a dilettante) and a professor of painting, under the names of Ecelenza and Compare, divided into eight _venti_, or winds, with which the Venetian vessel is borne into the deep Sea of Painting, as its Absolute Mistress, to the confusion of such as do not understand the loadstone and the compass."

Thus, much in the same manner as we judge from the facade of the style of a whole edifice in the gothic taste, the reader may gather, from this very loaded title, the exact nature of Boschini's work. It is, indeed, written in the most verbose style of the Seicentisti; a mixture of unsound reasoning, strange allegory, tame allusions, frivolous conceits invented on every name, and phraseology that surpasses even that of Ciampoli and Melosio; for these at least wrote in the Italian dialect, whereas Boschini protests that he does not pretend to a _foreign idiom_, but to speak like the Venetian people. From this undistinguishing kind of nationality arises his malevolence against Vasari, and the methods of the foreign schools, as well as his exaggerated praise of the Venetian artists, whom he prefers, as we learn from his title page, to all the painters in the world, not merely as respects their manner of colouring, but in point of invention and design. What is worse, he makes no distinction between the fine old painters and the mannerists of his own times, and speaks as if the masters of the former age were still flourishing, and teaching in their schools, or as if the modern possessed the same powers and the same reputation; a gross equivocation into which the tiresome _Compare_, or gossip, is continually falling, and which his credulous Excellency as frequently commends.

If, however, in treating of Vasari, I in some measure excused his partialities, in consideration of the prejudices acquired by his education, which are afterwards with difficulty eradicated; I ought to make use of the same liberality in regard to Boschini, more especially as he possessed fewer opportunities of ridding himself of them, never having visited Rome or Florence, and giving his opinions upon foreign schools, from the hearsay relations of others. It is true that he cites in favour of the Venetians the opinion of many distinguished men; as that of Velasco, who protested to Salvator Rosa, that Raffaello was no longer a favourite with him after having seen Venice; or that of Rubens, who, after spending upwards of six years at Rome to little purpose, formed his style on the models of Titian. Albano likewise regretted that he had not commenced his studies in Venice, preferably to Rome; and Pier da Cortona having seen the works of the Venetian School, cancelled some of his labours, and ornamented afresh two chambers of the Palazzo Pitti, and one in the Casa Barberini. But these authorities, which he adduces along with others, taken chiefly from artists who preferred beauty of colouring to accuracy of design, do not prove much, and might be opposed by other authorities, even of great painters, more particularly English and French, who embraced a contrary opinion. Besides, the panegyrists thus cited by him, did not commend the modern so much as the ancient Venetian painters, so as by no means to possess the weight he would attribute to them. Moreover, in the present day, when so much has been written upon Italian painting, we shall not, on investigating what is to be admired and imitated, and what to be shunned or approved in the examples of the Venetians, appeal to the vain boastings of the sixteenth century, but to the critics of our own times. Still we do not mean to deny, but that the work in question, however strangely written, contains many valuable historical notices, and many pictorial precepts, particularly useful to such as cannot aspire to any thing beyond the character of mere naturalists, incapable of drawing a stroke that does not appear in their model, and content with portraying the dimensions of any kind of head or body, provided they be of the human shape, inventing with infinite difficulty, slow in resolving, and quite incapable of forming a grand history, more especially of battles, of flights, in short of any objects they never saw. This sect, which at that period boasted many followers, and which is not even yet extinct, is there ridiculed in a vein it is impossible to surpass, and would that the party proceeding to the opposite extreme of mannerism, at that time triumphant in Venice, had not met with equal applause! But how difficult is it to observe the golden mean! though the artists of Bologna will point out the way in due time. At present we must return to those of Venice.

Numerous other artists very nearly approached the style of Palma. Boschini enumerates six, whose manner so extremely resembles him, as to impose upon those who have not tact enough to detect the peculiar characteristics of each; (and in Palma there is a mixture of the Roman and Venetian,) consisting of the names of Corona, Vicentino, Peranda, Aliense, Malombra, and Pilotto. The same author extols them as illustrious painters; and truly, besides the splendour of their colouring, they composed upon a magnificent scale, emulating, for the most part, the fire and the striking contrasts that produced such an impression after the time of Titian, executing pictures every way deserving of a place in good collections.

Leonardo Corona, of Murano, who, from a copyist, succeeded in becoming a painter, was the rival of Palma, and nevertheless enjoyed the patronage of Vittoria; whether to keep alive the emulation of the former, or for some other reason, is uncertain. He sometimes prepared models in clay, to discover the best distributions of his chiaroscuro. By aid of these he painted his Annunciation, at SS. Giovanni and Paolo, a work very highly commended, as well as his picture at San Stefano, displaying a grandeur that arrests the eye, and reminds us more of Titian than any other model. In general, however, Corona exhibited more of Tintoretto, if not in his colouring, which in the present day appears to more advantage, at least in many other points. He produced a crucifixion so much in this artist's style, that Ridolfi has defended him with the utmost difficulty from the charge of theft. He availed himself likewise of the engravings of Flemish artists, particularly in the composition of his landscape. He did not long flourish; but left an excellent imitator of his style in Baldassare d'Anna, an artist of Flemish origin, who completed a few of his master's pieces. He also produced some original pieces for the Servi and other churches, which, though inferior to those of Corona in the selection of forms, yet surpass them in the softness, and sometimes in the force of their chiaroscuro.

Andrea Vicentino was, according to some writers, a Venetian, and pupil to Palma; not excelling in point of taste, he was nevertheless very skilful in the handling of his colours, and shewed great power of invention. Being employed in many labours, both within and without the boundaries of Venice, and even in depicting histories of the Republic, which still continue to adorn several halls in the Palazzo Grande, he was one of the most popular artists of his time. He rarely fails to exhibit in his works some perspective, or some figure borrowed, according to the custom of the plagiarists, from the best masters: including even Bassano, an artist of few ideas constantly repeated, and so far less easily pillaged with impunity. At the same time he bestows upon his plagiarisms a beauty of composition, and a general effect that does honour to his talents, applicable to every variety of subject. He could also employ a very delicate, tasteful, and effective pencil, when he chose to exert himself. In his grounds, however, he must have been less successful, many of his paintings being already much defaced. In collections, always more favourable to their duration than public places, we may find several in good preservation, and deserving of much commendation, as we gather from his Solomon Anointed on becoming king of Israel, preserved in the Royal Gallery at Florence. Marco Vicentino, son of Andrea, also acquired some celebrity by his imitations, and more by the name of his father.