Chapter V: School of Milan (1)

EPOCH I.

_Account of the Ancients until the time of Vinci._

If in each of our pictoric schools we have adhered to the plan of tracing back the memorials of more barbarous ages, and thence proceeding to more cultivated periods, Milan more especially as the capital of Lombardy, and the court of the Lombard kings, will afford us an epoch remarkable no less for its lofty character than for the grandeur of its monuments. When Italy passed from the dominion of the Goths to that of the Longobards, the arts, which invariably follow in the train of fortune, transferred their primary seat from Ravenna to Milan, to Monza, and to Pavia. Each of these places still retains traces of the sort of design now entitled, both on account of the place and the time, Longobardic, much in the same manner as in the diplomatic science we distinguish by the same name certain characters peculiar to that age, or rather to those ages, for after the Longobards were driven from Italy, the same taste in writing and sculpture continued to flourish during a great part of them. This style, as exhibited in works, both of metal and of marble, is coarse and hard beyond the example of any preceding age, and is seen most frequently and to most advantage in the representation of monsters, birds, and quadrupeds rather than of human figures. At the cathedral, at S. Michele, and at S. Giovanni in Pavia, appear some friezes over the gates, consisting of animals chained in a variety of ways to one another, sometimes in natural positions, and sometimes with the head turned behind. In the interior of the same churches, as well as in some others, we meet also with capitals, presenting similar figures, not unfrequently united to historical representations of men, differing so much from the human figure as to appear belonging to another species. The same kind of abuse of the art was practised in places under the sway of the Longobard dukes, one of which was the Friuli, which still preserves a number of these barbarous efforts. In Cividale there is a marble altar, first begun by Duke Pemmone, and completed by his son Ratchi, who lived during the eighth century. The bassi-relievi consist of Christ seated between different angels, his Epiphany, and the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin.[38] Art would appear scarcely capable of producing any thing more rude than these figures, yet whoever will be at the pains of examining the frieze on a gate at the same place, or the capitals of the pillars of S. Celso at Milan,[39] works of the tenth century, will admit that it was susceptible of still greater corruption when it added absurdity to its coarseness, and produced distorted and dwarfish figures, all hands and all heads, with legs and feet incapable of supporting them. There are an infinite number of similar marbles, and of like design, at Verona and other places. To these, nevertheless, are opposed other monuments which will not permit us to admit, as a general rule, that every trace of good taste was then extinct in Italy. I might easily adduce instances, drawn from different arts, and in particular from that of working in gold, which, during the tenth century, boasted its Volvino, who produced the very celebrated altar-piece at S. Ambrogio in Milan, a work which may be pronounced equal in point of style to the finest specimens of the dittici, or small ivory altar-pieces, that the museums of sacred art can boast.

Footnote 38: The inscription is annexed to it, and may be found
in Bertoli, _Antichita di Aquileia_, num. 516.

Footnote 39: See the Dottore Gaetano Bugati, in his Historical
and Critical account of the relics and the worship of San
Celso the Martyr, p. 1; and the P. M. Allegranza,
Explanations and Reflections relating to some sacred
monuments at Milan, p. 168.

Confining myself, however, to the subject before me, we know that Tiraboschi remarked in the palace of Monza, some of the most ancient pictures belonging to those ages, while other similar reliques are pointed out at S. Michele in Pavia, although placed in too elevated a situation to permit us to form an exact judgment of them. Others yet more extensive exist in Galliano, of which a description is given in the _Opuscoli_ of P. Allegranza, (p. 193). Upon this point I may observe, that the Treatise upon Painting already mentioned, was discovered in a manuscript in the University of Cambridge to have had this title:--_Theophilus Monachus_ (elsewhere _qui et Rugerius_), _de omni scientia artis pingendi. Incipit Tractatus Lumbardicus qualiter temperantur colores, &c._ This is a convincing proof, that if painting could then boast an asylum in Italy, it must have been more particularly in Lombardy. And in the church of S. Ambrogio, just mentioned, proofs of this are not wanting. Over the Confessional is seen a ceiling in _terra cotta_, with figures in basso-relievo, tolerably designed and coloured, resembling the composition of the best mosaic-workers in Ravenna and in Rome, supposed to be the work of the tenth century, or thereabouts. The figures of the Sleeping Saints are also seen near the gate, which must have been painted about the same time, and were at one time covered with lime, though they have since been brought to light and very carefully preserved by the learned ecclesiastics who are entrusted with the care of the temple. The portico has also a figure of the Redeemer, with a holy man worshipping at his feet, wholly in the Greek manner; besides a Crucifixion, which, to judge from the characters, might more suitably be ascribed to the thirteenth century than to the next. I omit the mention of several figures of the Crucified Saviour and of the Virgin, interspersed through the city and the state; contenting myself with referring to those of our Lady placed at S. Satiro and at Gravedona, which are of very ancient date.

From the period of these first efforts, I am of opinion that the art of painting continued to flourish throughout the state and city of Milan, though we are not fortunate enough to retain sufficient memorials of it to compile a full historical account. For little mention has been made by our oldest writers concerning the artists, except incidentally, as by Vasari in his Lives of Bramante, of Vinci, and of Carpi, and by Lomazzo, in his Treatise, and in his Temple, or Theatre[40] of Painting. As little likewise has been said by several of the more modern writers, nor that always with good authority, such as Torre, Latuada, Santagostini, whose narratives were collected by Orlandi, and inserted in his Dictionary. Some supplementary information has been supplied by _Notices of the Paintings of Italy_ as to a variety of artists, and their exact age; and by the New Guide to Milan, truly new and unique until this period in Italy, and reflecting the highest credit upon the Ab. Bianconi, who not only points out every thing most rare in the city, but teaches us, by sound rules, how best to distinguish excellence from mediocrity and inferiority in the art. To this we may add the name of the Consiglier de' Pagave, who published very interesting notices relating to this school, in the third, fifth, and eighth volumes of the new Sienese edition of Vasari. I am also enabled to furnish considerable information in addition, politely transmitted to me in manuscript by the last writer, for the present work. From these I am happy to announce we may become acquainted with the names of new masters, along with much chronological information of a sounder kind, relating to those already known, frequently derived from the _Necrologio_ of Milan, which had been carefully preserved by one of the public functionaries of that city.

Footnote 40: He borrowed the idea of this work from the Theatre
of Giulio Camillo, with whom he compares his own Treatise in
chap. ix. Hence, as in the case of some books which have two
titles, I judge it best to call it by this name (Theatre)
also, as others have done.

By aid of these, and other materials I have to bring forward, I prepare to treat of the Milanese School from as early a date as 1335, when Giotto was employed in ornamenting various places in the city, which, down to the time of Vasari, continued to be esteemed as most beautiful specimens of the art. Not long subsequent to Giotto, an artist named Stefano Fiorentino was invited thither by Matteo Visconti, and is celebrated as one of the most accomplished pupils of the former. But he was compelled by indisposition to abandon the work he had undertaken in that city; nor do we know that at that period he had any successor in the Giotto manner. About the year 1370, Gio. da Milano, pupil to Taddeo Gaddi, arrived there, so able an artist that his master, at his death, entrusted to him the care of his son Angiolo, and another son, whom he was to instruct in a knowledge of the art. It is therefore evident that the Florentine early exercised an influence over the Milanese School. We are informed at the same time of two native artists, who, according to Lomazzo, flourished at the period of Petrarch and of Giotto. These are Laodicia di Pavia, called by Guarienti, _pittrice_, and Andrino di Edesia, also said to belong to Pavia, although both his name and that of Laodicia lead us to conjecture that they must have been of Greek origin. To Edesia and his school have been attributed some frescos which yet remain at S. Martino and other places in Pavia.[41] I cannot speak positively of the authors; their taste is tolerably good, and the colouring partakes of that of the Florentines of the age. Michel de Roncho, a Milanese, is another artist discovered by Count Tassi, at the same time that he gives some account of the two Nova who flourished at Bergamo. Michele is said to have assisted in their labours in the cathedral of that city, from the year 1376 to 1377, and remnants of these paintings survive, which shew that they approached nearer the composition of Giotto than the artists of Pavia. There are some pictures in Domodossola that also bring us acquainted with an able artist of Nova. They are preserved in Castello Sylva and elsewhere, and bear the following memorandum--_Ego Petrus filius Petri Pictoris de Novaria hoc opus pinxi_, 1370. Without, however, going farther than Milan, we there find in the Sacristy of the Conventuali, as well as in different cloisters, paintings produced in the fourteenth century, without any indication of their authors, and most frequently resembling the Florentine manner, though occasionally displaying a new and original style, not common to any other school of Italy.

Footnote 41: See Notizie delle Pitture, Sculture, ed
Architetture d'Italia, by Sig. Bertoli, p. 41, &c.

Among these anonymous productions in the ancient style, the most remarkable is what remains in the Sacristy of Le Grazie, where every panel presents us with some act from the Old or the New Testament. The author would appear to have lived during the latter part of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth centuries; nor is it easy to meet with any other Italian production, conducted during that age by a single artist, so abundantly supplied with figures. The style is dry, but the colouring, where it has escaped the power of the sun, is so warm, so well laid on, so boldly relieved from its grounds, that it yields in nothing to the best Venetian or Florentine pieces of the time, insomuch that whoever be the artist he is fully entitled to all the praise of originality. Another Lombard artist, formerly believed to be a Venetian, is better known. His name has been incorrectly given by Vasari, in his life of Carpaccio, and in that of Gian Bellini, as well as by Orlandi and by Guarienti, in three articles inserted in the Dictionary of art. In one article, following Vasari, he is called by Orlandi, Girolamo Mazzoni, or Morzoni, and in the two others he is named Giacomo Marzone, and Girolamo Morzone, by Guarienti, a writer happier perhaps in adding to the errors and prejudices entertained about the old painters, than in correcting them. His real name is to be found upon an altar-piece which is still preserved at Venice, or in its island of S. Elena, a piece representing the Assumption of the Virgin, with the titular saint, S. Gio. Batista, S. Benedetto, and a holy Martyr, along with the following inscription--_Giacomo Morazone a laura questo lauorier. An. Dni._ MCCCCXXXXI. The excellent critic Zanetti is persuaded, from its Lombard dialect, as well as from the fact of the artist having painted a good deal in different cities of Lombardy, as related by Vasari, that he does not belong to the Venetian, but to the Lombard School, and the more so as he took his name from Morazzone, a place in Lombardy. It is true, that granting this, there is no great sacrifice made, inasmuch as this Giacomo, who, when in Venice, was the competitor of Jacobello del Fiore, displayed little merit, at least in this picture, which cannot boast even a foot placed upon the ground according to the rules of perspective, nor any other merit that raises it much above the character of the thirteenth century.

Michelino was an artist who also retained the ancient style, and continued to the last the practice of making his figures large and his buildings small, a practice blamed by Lomazzo even in the oldest painters. He assigns to him a rank, however, among the best of his age on account of his designs of animals of every kind, which he painted, says Lomazzo, wonderfully well, and of the human figure, which he executed with effect, rather in burlesque than in serious subjects; and in this style was esteemed the model of his school. He would appear likewise to have been esteemed by foreigners, as we find in the Notizia Morelli, that in the house of the Vendramini at Venice there was preserved "a small book in 4to. bound in kid-skin, with figures of animals coloured" by this artist. At a little interval, according to Pagave, we are to place the period of Agostino di Bramantino, an artist unknown to Bottari, as well as to more recent investigators of pictorial history. I apprehend that an error committed by Vasari gave rise to an additional one in the mind of Pagave, a very accurate writer. Vasari, remarking that in a chamber of the Vatican, which was subsequently painted by Raffaello, the previous labours of Pier della Francesca, of Bramantino, of Signorelli, and of the Ab. di S. Clemente, were destroyed to accommodate the former, supposes that the two first of the artists, thus sacrificed, conducted them contemporaneously under Nicholas V. about 1450. Induced by the esteem he had for the same Bramantino, he collected notices also of his other works, and discovered him to be the author of the Dead Christ foreshortened, of the Family which deceived the horse at Milan, and of several perspectives; the whole of which account is founded in error, when attributed to a Bramantino, who flourished about 1450, yet the whole is true when we suppose them to have been the work of one Bramantino, pupil to Bramante, who lived in the year 1529. I cannot perceive, however, in what way the Consiglier Pagave could have detected Vasari's mistake in the Milanese works; whilst in those of the Vatican, which, according to Vasari himself, all belong to the same individual, he has taken occasion to repeat it. He had better have asserted that the historian had erred in point of chronology, in supposing that Bramantino painted under the pontificate of Nicholas V. than have ventured on the hypothesis of the existence of an ancient Bramantino, called Agostino, by whom a very beautiful work was to be seen in the papal palace, and no other specimen at Rome, at Milan, or elsewhere. I disclaim all belief then in this old artist until more authentic proofs are brought forward of his existence, and I shall be enabled to throw new light upon the subject before I conclude the present epoch.

In the time of the celebrated Francesco Sforza, and of the Cardinal Ascanio his brother, both desirous no less of enriching the city with fine buildings than these last with the most beautiful decorations; there sprung up a number of architects and statuaries, and, what is more to our purpose, of very able painters for the age. Their reputation spread through Italy, and induced Bramante to visit Milan, a young artist who possessed the noblest genius, both for architecture and painting, and who, after acquiring a name in Milan, taught the arts to Italy and to the world. The former had made little progress in point of colouring, which, though strong, was somewhat heavy and sombre, nor in regard to their drapery, which is disposed in straight, hard folds, until the time of Bramante, while they are also cold in their features and attitudes. They had improved the art, however, in regard to perspective, no less in execution than in writing on the subject; a circumstance that led Lomazzo to observe, that as design was the peculiar excellence of the Romans, and colouring of the Venetians, so perspective seemed to be the chief boast of the Lombards. It will be useful to report his own words, from his Treatise upon Painting, p. 405. "In this art of correctly viewing objects, the great inventors were Gio. da Valle, Costantino Vaprio, Foppa, Civerchio, Ambrogio and Filippo Bevilacqui, and Carlo, all of them belonging to Milan. Add to these Fazio Bembo da Valdarno, and Cristoforo Moretto of Cremona, Pietro Francesco of Pavia, and Albertino da Lodi;[42] who, besides the works they produced at other places, painted for the Corte Maggiore at Milan, those figures of the armed barons, in the time of Francesco Sforza, first duke of Milan:" that is to say, between the period of 1447 and 1466.

Footnote 42: Note that Lomazzo would not have passed over
the name of Agostino di Bramantino, were it true that he had
flourished as early as 1420, and employed himself at Rome,
an honour to which the rest of these Milanese did not
attain.

In treating of these artists, I shall observe nothing further in reference to the last four, having described those of Cremona in their own place, and not being aware that any thing more than the name of the other two survives at Milan; I say at Milan, because Pier Francesco of Pavia, whose surname was Sacchi, left, as we shall find, some fine specimens at Genoa, where he resided during some time. It is doubtful whether any altar-piece remains by the first of these, (Gio. della Valle,) it being impossible to ascertain the fact. Nor do I know of any genuine work belonging to Costantino Vaprio, though there is a Madonna painted by another Vaprio, surrounded by saints in different compartments, at the Serviti, in Pavia, with this inscription:--_Augustinus de Vaprio pinxit 1498_: a production of some merit.

Vincenzio Foppa, said by Ridolfi to have flourished about the year 1407, is esteemed almost the founder of the Milanese School, in which he distinguished himself during the sovereignty of Filippo Visconti, and that of Francesco Sforza. I alluded to his name in the Venetian School, to which he is referable from his being of Brescia, whatever Lomazzo may on the other hand contend. It is my wish to avoid all questions of nationality, and the compendious method of my work will be a sufficient apology in this respect, more particularly as far as relates to the names of less celebrated artists. But with the head of a school, such as Foppa, I cannot consider it a loss of time to investigate his real country, in particular as the elucidation of many confused and doubtful points in the history of the art is found to depend upon this. In Vasari's Life of Scarpaccia we find it mentioned, that about the middle of the century "Vincenzio, a Brescian painter, was held in high repute, as it is recounted by Filarete." And in the life of this excellent architect, as well as in that of Michelozzo, he says, that in some of their buildings, erected under Duke Francesco, Vincenzo di Zoppa (read Foppa), a Lombard artist, painted the interior, "as no better master was to be met with in the surrounding states." Now that there was a Vincenzo, a Brescian artist, who then and subsequently flourished, and who ranked among the best artists, is proved by Ambrogio Calepino, in his ancient edition of 1505, at the word _pingo_. There, after having applauded Mantegna beyond all other artists of his age, he adds:--_Huic accedunt Jo. Bellinus Venetus, Leonardus Florentinus, et Vincentius Brixianus, excellentissimo ingenio homines, ut qui cum omni antiquitate de pictura possint contendere._ After so high a testimony to his merits, written, if I mistake not, while Foppa was still living, though edited after his decease, (as we noticed from the eulogy written by Boschini on Ridolfi, in its proper place); let us next attend to that found on his monument in the first cloister of S. Barnaba at Brescia, which runs as follows:--_Excellentiss. ac. eximii. pictoris. Vincentii. de. Foppis. ci. Br. 1492._ (Zamb. p. 32.) To these testimonials I may add that from the hand of the author, which I discovered in the Carrara Gallery at Bergamo, where, on a small ancient picture, conducted with much care, and a singular study of foreshortening, extremely rare for the period, representing Christ crucified between the two Thieves, is written:--_Vincentius Brixiensis fecit, 1455._--What proof more manifest can be required for the identity of one and the same painter, recorded by various authors with so much contradiction with regard to name, country, and age?

It must therefore be admitted, after a comparison of the passages adduced, that there is only a single Brescian artist in question, that he is not to be referred to so remote a period as reported, and that he could not have painted in the year 1407 of the vulgar era, inasmuch as he very nearly reaches the beginning of the sixteenth century. We may for the same reasons dismiss from history those specious accounts interspersed by Lomazzo, asserting that Foppa drew the proportions of his figures from Lysippus; that Bramante acquired the art of perspective from his writings, out of which he composed a treatise of essential utility to Raffaello, to Polidoro, and to Gaudenzio; and that Albert Durer and Daniel Barbaro availed themselves, by plagiarism, of Foppa's inventions. Such assertions, already in a great measure refuted by the learned Consiglier Pagave in his notes to Vasari,[43] first took their rise in supposing that the age of Foppa was anterior to Piero della Francesca, from whom perspective in Italy may truly be said to have dated its improvement. Next to him Foppa was one of the first who cultivated the same art, as clearly appears from the little picture already mentioned at Bergamo. In Milan there are some of his works remaining at the hospital, executed upon canvass, and a martyrdom of S. Sebastiano, at Brera, in fresco, which, for design of the naked figure, for the natural air of the heads, for its draperies and for its tints, is very commendable, though greatly inferior in point of attitude and expression. I have frequently doubted whether there were two Vincenzi of Brescia, since Lomazzo, besides Vincenzo Foppa, whom, against the received opinion, he makes a native of Milan, marks down in his index a Vincenzio Bresciano, of whom I am not aware that he makes the slightest mention throughout the whole of his work. I am led to suspect, that meeting with some works bearing the signature of _Vincenzio Bresciano_, without the surname of Foppa, beyond the limits of Milan, the historian, fixed in his persuasion that Foppa must be a native of Milan, set down two artists of the name instead of a single one, and that this, moreover, was perhaps an old prejudice, prevailing in the Milanese School, and which Lomazzo was unable to dismiss. National errors and prejudices are always the last to be renounced. In the Notizia Morelli, a Vincenzo Bressano the elder is twice mentioned, an adjunct, which, if not a surname, as it was in the instance of Minzocchi, may have arisen from some false report connected with the two Vincenzi Bresciani. Indeed we have repeatedly observed that the names of artists have been very frequently drawn, not from authentic writings, but from common report, which generally presents us with a worse account of what has been ill heard or understood.

Footnote 43: Vasari, vol. iii. p. 233.

Vincenzo Civerchio, denominated by Vasari Verchio, to which Lomazzo, who asserts him to have been a Milanese, added the surname of Il Vecchio, is an artist whom we have recorded in the Venetian School, to which he is referred as a native of Crema, though he resided at Milan and educated several excellent pupils for that school, and with the exception of Vinci is the best entitled of any master to its gratitude. Vasari, when he praises his works in fresco, considers him in no way inferior to Foppa. In his figures he was extremely studied, and admirable in his method of grouping them in the distance, so as to throw the low grounds back, and bring down the higher parts with a gentle gradation. Of this he affords a model at S. Eustorgio in some histories of S. Peter Martyr, painted for a chapel of that name, which are highly commended by Lomazzo, though they have since been covered with plaister, there remaining only from the hand of Civerchio the summits of the cupola, which we trust will enjoy a longer date.[44] Ambrogio Bevilacqua is an artist known by a production at S. Stefano, representing S. Ambrogio with saints Gervasio and Protasio standing at his side. Other paintings procured for him the reputation of a fine drawer of perspective, though in the specimen here mentioned he has undoubtedly not adhered to its rules. The design, however, is such as approaches, with some slight traces of dryness, to a good style. Memorials of this artist are found as early as 1486; but of his brother Filippo, his assistant, and of Carlo, a native of Milan, mentioned by Lomazzo in the same work, I am able to find no account. There are two, however, who are referred by our already highly commended correspondent to this more remote epoch. These are Gio. de' Ponzoni, who left a picture of S. Cristoforo in a church near the city, called Samaritana, and a Francesco Crivelli, who is reported to have been the first who painted portraits in the city of Milan.

Footnote 44: The epochs relating to this artist appear difficult,
and almost irreconcileable. From Lomazzo's account he was a
painter as early as 1460, and according to Ronna, in his
_Zibaldone Cremasco_, for the year 1795, p. 84, there are
existing documents which prove that he was still living in
1535. If we give credit to these, Civerchio must have
flourished to an extreme age, so as to be ranked in this
point with Titian, with Calvi, and the other hoary-headed
octogenarians of the art.

Of those who here follow, a part formed the body of painters under the government of Lodovico the Moor, during whose time Vinci resided at Milan, and others were gradually making progress during the following years, though not any wholly succeeded in freeing themselves from the old style. The first on the list are the two Bernardi, as frequently also called Bernardini, natives of Trevilio in the Milanese, the one of the family Butinoni, the other of that of Zenale, both pupils of Civerchio, and his rivals both in painting and in writing. Trevilio is a territory in the Milanese, at that period included in that of Bergamo, and for this reason comprehended by Count Tassi in its school. It is also a considerable distance from Trevigi, where he took advantage of the resemblance of the name to announce one Bernardino da Trevigi, a painter and architect, who never existed. Vasari mentions a Bernardino da Trevio (he meant to say Trevilio) who, in the time of Bramante, was an engineer at Milan, "a very able designer, and esteemed an excellent master by Vinci, though his manner was somewhat harsh and dry in his pictures;" and he then cites among his other works a picture of the Resurrection at the cloister of the Grazie, which presents some beautiful foreshortenings. It is surprising how Bottari should have changed Trevio into Trevigi, and how Orlandi should have understood Vasari as writing of Butinone, when, guided by Lomazzo, at page 271, and in other parts of the treatise, it was easy to conjecture that he was there speaking of Zenale of Trevilio. He was a distinguished character, in the confidence of Vinci,[45] and in the Treatise upon Painting compared with Mantegna, besides being continually referred to as an example in the art of perspective, on which, when old, in 1524, he composed a work, and put down a variety of observations. There, too, among others, he treated the question so long contested in those days, whether the objects represented small and in the distance ought to be less distinct in order to imitate nature, than those that are larger and more near, a question which he explained in the negative, contending rather that distant objects should be as highly finished and well proportioned as those more fully before the eye. This, then, is the Bernardino, so much commended by Vasari, whose opinion of this artist may be verified by viewing the Resurrection at Le Grazie, and a Nunziata at San Sempliciano, presenting a very fine piece of architecture, calculated to deceive the eye. This, however, is the best portion of the painting, as the figures are insignificant, both in themselves and in their drapery. In respect to Butenone, his contemporary, and companion also when he painted at San Pietro in Gessato, we may conclude that he displayed an excellent knowledge of perspective, since it is affirmed by Lomazzo. For the rest, his works, with the exception of a few pictures for rooms, better designed than coloured, have all perished. There is a Madonna represented between some saints, which I saw in possession of the Consiglier Pagave, at whose suggestion I add to the pupils of Civerchio, a Bartolommeo di Cassino of Milan, and Luigi de' Donati of Como, of whom authentic altar-pieces remain.

Footnote 45: Lomazzo, in his Treatise, (book i. chap, ix.),
relates that Vinci in his Supper had endued the countenance
of both the saints Giacomo with so much beauty, that
despairing to make that of the Saviour more imposing, he
went to advise with Bernardo Zenale, who to console him
said, "Leave the face of Christ unfinished as it is, as you
will never be able to make it worthy of Christ among those
Apostles," and this Leonardo did.

At the period when these artists were in repute, Bramante came to Milan. His real name, as reported to us by Cesariani his disciple and the commentator on Vitruvius, was Donato, and he was, as is supposed, of the family of Lazzari, though this has been strongly contested in the Antichita Picene, vol. x. There it is shewn, at some length, that his real country was not Castel Durante, now Urbania, as so many writers assert, but a town of Castel Fermignano. Both places are in the state of Urbino, whence he used formerly to be called Bramante di Urbino. There he studied the works of Fra Carnevale, though Vasari gives no further information respecting his education. He continues to relate that on leaving his native place he wandered through several cities in Lombardy, executing, to the best of his ability, small works, until his arrival at Milan, where, becoming acquainted with the conductors of the cathedral, and among these with Bernardo, he resolved to devote himself wholly to architecture, which he did. Before the year 1500 he went to Rome, where he entered the service of Alexander VI. and Julius II., and died there in his seventieth year, in 1514. We may here conjecture that the historian gave himself very little anxiety about investigating the memoirs of this great man. Sig. Pagave has proved to be a far more accurate inquirer into the truth. Animated by his love of this quality, the soul of all history, he at once renounced the honour his country would have derived from having instructed a Bramante; nor yet has he referred to him as a pupil to Carnevale, or to Piero della Francesca, or to Mantegna, like some writers cited by Signor Colucci. He has properly noticed his arrival at Milan, already as a master, in 1476, after having erected both palaces and temples in the state of Romagna. From this period, until the fall of Lodovico, that is until 1499, he remained at Milan, where he executed commissions, with large salaries for the court, and was employed as well by private persons in works of architecture, and sometimes of painting.

Cellini in his second treatise denies Bramante the fame of an excellent painter, placing him in the middling class, and at this period he is known by few in lower Italy, where he is never named in collections, though he is very generally met with in the Milanese. Cesariano and Lomazzo had already asserted the same thing, the latter having frequently praised him in his work when giving an account of his pictures both sacred and profane, in distemper and in fresco, as well as of his portraits. His general manner, he observes, much resembles that of Andrea Mantegna. Like him he had employed himself in copying from casts, which led him to throw his lights with too much force on his fleshes. In the same manner also as Mantegna he covered his models with glued canvass, or with pasteboard, in order that in the curves and folds he might correct the ancients. And like him he employed for painting in distemper, a kind of viscous water, an instance of which is adduced by Lomazzo, who repaired one of the specimens. Most of Bramante's pictures in fresco, mentioned by Lomazzo and by Scaramuccia as adorning the public places in Milan, are now destroyed or defaced, if we except those that are preserved in the chambers of the Palazzi Borri and Castiglioni, which are pretty numerous. There is also a chapel in the Certosa at Pavia, said to have been painted by him. His proportions are square, and sometimes have an air of coarseness, his countenances are full, the heads of his old men grand, his colouring is very lively and well relieved from the ground, though not free from some degree of crudity. This character I have remarked in one of his altar-pieces, with various saints, and with fine perspective, in possession of the Cav. Melzi, and the same in a picture at the Incoronata in Lodi, a very beautiful temple erected by Gio. Bataggio, a native of the place, from the design of Bramante. His masterpiece, which is to be seen at Milan, is a S. Sebastiano, in that saint's church, where scarcely a trace of the style of the fourteenth century is perceptible. The Notizia Morelli points out his picture of a Pieta, at S. Pancrazio, in Bergamo, which Pasta had mistaken for one of Lotto, and mentions also his picture of the Philosophers, painted by Bramante in 1486, belonging to the same city.

He educated two pupils in Milan, whose names have survived. One of these is Nolfo da Monza, who is said to have painted from the designs furnished by Bramante, at S. Satiro and other places; an artist who, if not equal to the first painters, was nevertheless, it is remarked by Scanelli, of a superior character. In the sacristy also of S. Satiro, placed near the beautiful little temple of Bramante, are a number of old pictures, most probably from the hand of Nolfo. The other artist is Bramantino, supposed by Orlandi to have been the preceptor of Bramante, by others confounded with him, and finally discovered to have been his favourite disciple, from which circumstance he obtained his surname. His real name was Bartolommeo Suardi, an architect, and, what is more to my purpose, a painter of singular merit. In deceiving the eye of animals, he equalled the ancients, as we are acquainted by Lomazzo in the opening of his third book. During a period he followed his master; but on occasion of visiting Rome he improved his style, though not so much in regard to his figures and proportions, as in his colouring and his folds, which he made more wide and spacious. He was doubtless invited or conducted to Rome by Bramante, and there, under Pope Julius II., painted those portraits so highly praised by Vasari, and which, when about to be removed, to give place to Raffaello's, were first copied at the request of Jovius, who wished to insert them in his museum. It is certain that the Vatican paintings by Bramantino do not belong to the time of Nicholas V. as we have shewn. He returned from Rome to Milan, as we are informed by Lomazzo; and to this more favourable period we may refer his production of S. Ambrogio, and that of S. Michele, with a figure of the Virgin, coloured in the Venetian style, and recorded in the select Melzi gallery, and to be mentioned hereafter. There are also some altar-pieces both designed and coloured by him, in the church of S. Francesco, which display more elevation and dignity than belonged to his age. But his chief excellence was in perspective, and his rules have been inserted by Lomazzo in his work, out of respect to this distinguished artist. He likewise holds him up as a model, in his picture of the Dead Christ between the Maries, painted for the gate of S. Sepolcro, a work which produces a fine illusion; the legs of the Redeemer, in whatever point they are viewed, appearing with equal advantage to the eye. Other artists I am aware have produced the same effect: but it is a just, though a trite saying, that an inventor is worth more than all his imitators. The Cistercian fathers have a grand perspective in their monastery, representing the Descent of Christ into Purgatory, from his hand. It consists of few figures, little choice in the countenances, but their colouring is both powerful and natural; they are well placed, and well preserved in their distance, disposed in beautiful groups, with a pleasing retrocession of the pilasters, which serve to mark the place, united to a harmony that attracts the eye. He had a pupil named Agostin da Milano, well skilled in foreshortening, and who painted at the Carmine a piece that Lomazzo proposes, along with the cupola of Coreggio at the cathedral of Parma, as a model of excellence in its kind. His name is made very clear in the index of Lomazzo, as follows:--_Agostino di Bramantino of Milan, a painter and disciple of the same Bramantino._ I cannot imagine how such a circumstance escaped the notice of Sig. Pagave, and how he was led to present us with that more ancient Agostino Bramantino, (so called from his family name, not from that of his master) whose existence we have shewn to have been ideal, wholly arising out of a mistake of Vasari. The one here mentioned was real, though his name is so little known at Milan, as to lead us to suppose he must have passed much of his time in foreign parts. And we are even authorized to conjecture that he may be the same _Agostino delle Prospettive_ whom we meet with in Bologna, in 1525. All the circumstances are so strong, that in a matter of justice, they would have proved sufficient to establish his identity; his name of Agostino, his age, suitable to the preceptorship of Suardi, his excellence in the art, which procured for him his surname, and the silence of Malvasia, who could not be ignorant of him, but who, because he was drawing up a history of the Bolognese School only, omitted to mention him.

There were other artists about 1500, who, as it is said, following Foppa, painted in the style which we now call antico moderno. Ambrogio Borgognone represented at S. Simpliciano the histories of S. Sisinio and some accompanying martyrs, which adorn one of the cloisters. The thinness of the legs, and some other remains of his early education, are not so displeasing in this work, as we find its accurate study, and the natural manner in which it is conducted, calculated to please. The beauty of his youthful heads, variety of countenance, simplicity of drapery, and the customs of those times, faithfully portrayed in the ecclesiastical paraphernalia, and mode of living, together with a certain uncommon grace of expression, not met with in this or any other school, are sufficient to attract attention.

Gio. Donato Montorfano painted a Crucifixion, abounding with figures for the refectory of Le Grazie, where it is unfortunately thrown into the shade by the Grand Supper of Vinci. He cannot compete with a rival to whom many of the greatest masters are compelled to yield the palm. He excels only in his colouring, which has preserved his work fresh and entire, while that of Vinci shewed signs of decay in a few years. What is original in Montorfano is a peculiar clearness in his features, as well as in his attitudes, and which, if united to a little more elegance, would have left him but few equals in his line. He represents a group of soldiers seen playing, and in every countenance is depicted attention, and the desire of conquest. He has also some heads of a delicate air, extremely beautiful, though the distance in regard to their position is not well preserved. The architecture introduced, of the gates and edifices of Jerusalem, is both correct and magnificent, presenting those gradual retrocessions in perspective upon which this school at the time so much prided itself. He retained the habit which continued till the time of Gaudenzio at Milan, though long before reformed in other places, of mixing with his pictures some plastic work in composition, and thus giving in relief glories of saints, and ornaments of men and horses.

Ambrogio da Fossano, a place in the Piedmontese,[46] was an artist, who, at the grand Certosa in Pavia, designed the superb facade of the church, being an architect as well as a painter. In the temple before mentioned there is an altar-piece, which is ascribed either to him or his brother, not very highly finished, but in a taste not very dissimilar from that of Mantegna. Andrea Milanese, who has been confounded by one of Vasari's annotators with Andrea Salai, extorted the admiration of Zanetti, by an altar-piece he produced at Murano, executed in 1495, and it would appear that he studied in Venice. I cannot agree with Bottari that he is the same as Andrea del Gobbo, mentioned by Vasari in his life of Coreggio, since this last was a disciple of Gaudenzio.[47] About the same time flourished Stefano Scotto, the master of Gaudenzio Ferrari, much commended by Lomazzo for his art in arabesques, and of his family is perhaps a Felice Scotto, who painted a good deal at Como for private individuals, and left a number of pictures in fresco at S. Croce, relating to the life of S. Bernardino. His genius is varied and expressive, he displays judgment in composition, and is one of the best artists of the fourteenth century known in these parts. He was probably a pupil of some other school, his design being more elegant, and his colouring more clear and open than those of the Milanese. We might easily amplify the present list with other names, furnished by Morigia in his work on the Milanese nobility, where we find mentioned with praise Nicolao Piccinino, Girolamo Chiocca, Carlo Valli, or di Valle, brother to Giovanni, all of them Milanese, besides Vincenzo Moietta, a native of Caravaggio, who flourished in Milan about 1500, or something earlier, along with the foregoing. About the same period the study of miniature was greatly promoted by the two Ferranti, Agosto the son, and Decio the father, three works by whom are to be seen in the cathedral at Vigevano, consisting of a Missal, a book of the Evangelists, and one of the epistles illuminated with miniatures in the most exact taste.

Footnote 46: A number of places which are now included in the
Piedmontese, formerly belonged to the state of Milan, as we
have already observed. The city of Vercelli was united to
the house of Savoy in 1427, and was subsequently subject to
a variety of changes. Many of its more ancient painters are
referred to the Milanese as their scholars; but they may be
enumerated among the Piedmontese as citizens. This remark
will apply to many different passages, both in this and in
the fifth volume.

Footnote 47: Lomazzo, Trattato, c. 37.

Other professors then flourished throughout the state, of whom either some account remains in books, or some works with the signature of their names. At that period the Milanese was much more extensive than it has been since the cession of so large a portion to the house of Savoy. The artists belonging to the ceded portion will be considered by me in this school, to which they appertain, being educated in it, and instructing other pupils in it, in their turn. Hence besides those of Pavia, of Como, and others of the modern state, we shall in this chapter give some account of the Novarese and Vercellese artists (of whom I shall also give the information found in the prefaces to the tenth and eleventh volumes of Vasari, edited at Siena by P. della Valle), with others who flourished in the old state. Pavia boasted a Bartolommeo Bononi, by whom there is an altar-piece bearing the date of 1507, at San Francesco, and also one Bernardin Colombano who produced another specimen at the Carmine in 1515. In other churches I likewise met with some specimens by an unknown hand, (but perhaps by Gio. di Pavia, inserted by Malvasia in his catalogue of the pupils of Lorenzo Costa,) partaking a good deal of the Bolognese style of that age. At the same period flourished Andrea Passeri of Como, for whose cathedral he painted the Virgin among different apostles, in which the heads and the whole composition have some resemblance to the modern. But there is a dryness in the hands, with use of gilding unworthy of the age, (1505) in which his picture was painted. A Marco Marconi of Como, who flourished about 1500, displayed much of the Giorgione manner, and was probably a pupil of the Venetians. Troso da Monza was employed a good deal at Milan, and painted some pieces at S. Giovanni in his native place. Several histories of the Queen Teodelina, adorning the same church, executed in various compartments in 1444, are now also ascribed to him. It is not very easy to follow his inventions, somewhat confused and new in regard to the drapery and the Longobardish customs which he has there exhibited. There are some good heads, and colouring by no means despicable; for the rest, it is a mediocre production, and perhaps executed early in life. He is an artist much praised by Lomazzo for his other works which he left at the Palazzo Landi. They consist of Roman histories, a production, says Lomazzo, (p. 272) _quite surprising for the figures as well as the architecture and the perspective, which is stupendous_. Father Resta, cited by Morelli, who saw it in 1707, says that it almost astounded him by its surpassing excellence, beauty, and sweetness. (Lett. Pittor. tom. iii. p. 342.)

In the new state of Piedmont is situated Novara, where, in the archives of the cathedral, Gio. Antonio Merli painted in green earth Pietro Lombardo, with three other distinguished natives of Novara; an excellent portrait-painter for his age. In Vercelli, adjoining it, there flourished about 1460 Boniforte, Ercole Oldoni, and F. Pietro di Vercelli, of which last there is an ancient altar-piece preserved at S. Marco. Giovenone afterwards appeared, who is esteemed in that city as the first instructor of Gaudenzio, although Lomazzo is silent upon it. If he was not, he was worthy of the charge. The Augustin fathers possess a Christ risen from the Dead, between saints Margaret and Cecilia, with two angels, a picture of a noble character, in the taste of Bramantino and the best Milanese artists, and conducted with great knowledge of the naked figure and of perspective.

SCHOOL OF MILAN.

EPOCH II.

_Leonardo da Vinci establishes an Academy of Design at
Milan. His Pupils and the best native Artists down to the
time of Gaudenzio._

In treating of the Florentine School we took occasion to enter into a brief examination of the pictoric education of Vinci, of his peculiar style, and of his residence in different cities, among which was mentioned Milan, and the academy which he there instituted. He arrived in that city, according to the testimony of Vasari, in the year 1594, the first of the reign of Prince Lodovico Il Moro; or rather he resided there, if not altogether, at least for the execution of commissions, from 1482, as it has been recently supposed,[48] and left it after its capture by the French in 1499. The years spent by Lionardo at Milan were, perhaps, the happiest of his life, and certainly productive of the most utility to the art of any in the whole period of his career. The duke had deputed him to superintend an academy of design, which, if I mistake not, was the first in Italy, which gave the law to the leading ones in other parts. It continued to flourish after the departure of Vinci, was much frequented, and formed excellent pupils, maintaining in the place of its first director, his precepts, his writings, and his models. No very distinct accounts indeed of his method have survived; but we are certain that he formed it on scientific principles, deduced from philosophical reasoning, with which Vinci was familiar in every branch. His treatise upon painting is esteemed, however imperfect, as a kind of second canon of Polycletes, and explains the manner in which Lionardo taught.[49] We may also gather some knowledge of it from his other numerous and various writings, which, having been left to the care of Melzi, and in the course of time distributed, now form the ornament of different cabinets. Fourteen volumes of these presented to the public, are in the Ambrosian collection, and many of them are calculated to smooth the difficulties of the art to young beginners. It is further known that the author, having entered into a familiar friendship with Marcantonio della Torre, lecturer of Pavia, united with him in illustrating the science of anatomy, then little known in Italy, and that he represented with the utmost exactness, in addition to the human figure, that of the horse, in a knowledge of which he was esteemed quite unrivalled. The benefit he conferred upon the art by the study of optics is also well known, and no one was better acquainted with the nature of aerial perspective,[50] which became a distinctive and hereditary characteristic of his school. He was extremely well versed in the science of music, and in playing upon the lyre, and equally so in poetry and history. Here his example was followed by Luini and others; and to him likewise it was owing that the Milanese School became one of the most accurate and observing in regard to antiquity and to costume. Mengs has noticed before me that no artist could surpass Vinci in the grand effect of his chiaroscuro. He instructed his pupils to make as cautious an use of light as of a gem, not lavishing it too freely, but reserving it always for the best place. And hence we find in his, and in the best of his disciples' paintings, that fine relief, owing to which the pictures, and in particular the countenances, seem as if starting from the canvass.

Footnote 48: Amoretti, Memorie Storiche di Leonardo da Vinci,
p. 20.

Footnote 49: This work was reprinted at Florence, together
with the figures, 1792, an edition taken from a copy in the
hand of Stefano della Bella, belonging to the Riccardi
library. It was published by the learned librarian, the Ab.
Fontani, with the eulogy of Vinci, abounding with
information on his life and paintings, as well as on his
designs attached to it. To this is added the eulogy of
Stefano, and a Dissertation of Lami upon the Italian
painters and sculptors who flourished between the tenth and
the thirteenth centuries.

Footnote 50: Cellini declares that he borrowed a great number
of excellent observations upon perspective from one of
Vinci's discourses. (Tratt. ii. p. 153.)