I shall now pass from native to foreign artists, and shall take a brief

notice of them, since my work has grown upon me with so many new Italian

names, which are its proper object, that I have not much spare room for

foreigners, and a sufficient notice of them may be found in their own

country. Not a few _oltremonti_ painted at this period in Rome,

celebrated for the most part in the inferior branches of painting, where

they deserve commemoration. Some of them were employed in the churches,

as Gio. Batista Vanloo di Aix, a favorite scholar of Luti, who painted

the picture of the Flagellation at S. Maria in Monticelli. But he did

not remain in Rome, but passed to Piedmont, and from thence to Paris and

London, and was celebrated for his historical compositions, and highly

esteemed in portrait. Some years after Vanloo, Pietro Subleyras di

Gilles settled in Rome, and conferred great benefit on the Roman School;

for whilst it produced only followers of the old manner, and thus fell

gradually into decay, he very opportunely appeared and introduced an

entirely new style. An academy had been founded in Rome by Louis XIV.,

about the year 1666. Le Brun had there cooperated, the Giulio Romano of

France, and the most celebrated of the four Carli, who were at that time

considered the supporters of the art; the others were Cignani, Maratta,

and Loth. It had already produced some artists of celebrity, as Stefano

Parocel, Gio. Troy, Carlo Natoire, by whom many pictures are to be found

in the public edifices in Rome. There prevailed, however, in the style

of this school a mannerism, which in a few years brought it into

disrepute. Mengs designated it by the epithet of _spiritoso_, and it

consisted, according to him, in overstepping the limits of beauty and

propriety, overcharging both the one and the other, and aiming at

fascinating the eyes rather than conciliating the judgment. Subleyras,

educated in this academy, reformed this taste, retaining the good, and

rejecting the feeble part, and adding from his own genius what was

wanting to form a truly original manner. There was an engaging variety

in the air of his heads, and in his attitudes, and he had great merit in

the distribution of his chiaroscuro, which gives his pictures a fine

general effect. He painted with great truth; but the figures and the

drapery, under his pencil, took a certain fulness which in him appears

easy, because it is natural; it remained his own, for although he left

some scholars, none of them ever emulated the grandeur of style which

distinguished their master.

He was mature in talent when he left the academy, and the portrait which

he in preference to Masucci, painted of Benedict XIV., established his

reputation as the first painter in Rome. He was soon afterwards chosen

to paint the history of S. Basil, for the purpose of being copied in

mosaic for the church of the Vatican. The original is in the church of

the Carthusians, and astonishes, by the august representation of the

Sacrifice solemnly celebrated by the saint in the presence of the

emperor, who offers bread at the altar. The countenances are very

animated, and there is great truth in the drapery and accompaniments,

and the silks in their lucid and light folds appear absolutely real.

From this production, and others of smaller size, and particularly the

Saint Benedict at the church of the Olivetani di Perugia, which is

perhaps his masterpiece, he deserves a place in the first collections,

where, indeed, his pictures are rare and highly prized. Further notices

of this artist may he found in the second volume of the _Giornale delle

belle Arti_.

Egidio Ale, of Liege, studied in Rome, and became a spirited, pleasing,

and elegant painter. His works in the sacristy dell'Anima, in fresco and

oil, painted in competition with Morandi, Bonatti, and Romanelli, do him

honour. Ignazio Stern was a Bavarian, who was instructed by Cignani in

Bologna, and worked in Lombardy. An Annunciation in Piacenza, in the

church of the Nunziata, exhibits a certain grace and elegance, which is

peculiar to him, as is observed in the description of the public

pictures in that city. Stern afterwards established himself in Rome,

where he painted in fresco the sacristy of S. Paolino, and left some oil

pictures in the church of S. Elisabetta, and in other churches. He was

more particularly attached to profane history, conversations, and

similar subjects, which have a place even in royal collections. Spain

possessed a disciple of the school of Maratta, in Sebastiano Mugnoz, but

dying young he left few works behind him.

In this place I ought to notice an establishment designed _to revive the

art in that quarter, where it seemed to have so much declined_, as D.

Francesco Preziado, of that country, says, in a letter which we shall

shortly have occasion to mention with commendation. "The royal academy

of S. Ferdinand, in Madrid, which owed its origin to Philip V., and was

completed and endowed by Ferdinand VI., sent several students to Rome,

and provided for their maintenance." They there selected the master the

most agreeable to their genius, and had, in addition, a director, who

was employed to superintend their studies; as I am informed by Sig.

Bonaventura Benucci, a Roman painter, educated in that academy. Bottari

and all Rome called it the Spanish academy, and I myself, in a former

edition, followed the common report, and the two above named sovereigns

I described as the founders of the academy. Having been censured for

this statement, I have here thought proper to specify my authorities. It

may without dispute be asserted, that the Spanish students have left in

Rome many noble specimens of their talents and taste. D. Francesco

Preziado was for many years the director of this academy, and painted a

Holy Family at the S. S. Quaranta, in a good style. He made also a

valuable communication to the Lettere Pittoriche (tom. vi. p. 308), on

the artists of Spain, very useful to any one desiring information

respecting this school, which is less known than it deserves to be.

An institution very much on the plan of the French academy was founded

in Rome a few years ago, by his most faithful majesty, for Portuguese

students, to the promotion of which, two celebrated Portuguese, the Cav.

de Manique, intendant general of the police in Lisbon, and the Count de

Souza, minister of that court in Rome, had the merit of contributing

their assistance; the one having projected, and the other executed, the

plan in the year 1791. The government of the academy was entrusted to

the Sig. Gio. Gherardo de' Rossi, known for his very numerous and able

writings, to which he has recently added an ingenious little work,

intitled, _Scherzi poetici e pittorici_, with engravings by a celebrated

academician. These establishments are of too recent a date to allow me

to speak further respecting their productions.

The provincial painters have been occasionally noticed in connexion with

their masters. I here add a supplement, which may be useful in the way

of completion. Foligno possessed a Fra Umile Francescano, a good fresco

painter, engaged in Rome by Cardinal Castaldi, to ornament the tribune

of S. Margaret, while Gaulli and Garzi were commanded to paint the

pictures for it. The Abbate Dondoli lived at Spello at the beginning of

this century. He was more to be commended for his design than for his

colouring. Marini has some celebrity in S. Severino, his native place.

He was the scholar of Cipriano Divini, whom he surpassed in his art.

Marco Vanetti, of Loreto, is known to me more from his life of Cignani,

who was his master, than from his own works. Antonio Caldana, of Ancona,

painted a very large composition in Rome, in the sacristy of S. Niccola

da Tolentino, from the life of that saint. I do not know whether there

remain any works of his in his native place; but there are a great

number by a respectable artist, one Magatta, whose name was Domenico

Simonetti, and who painted the gallery of the Marchesi Trionfi; he

furnished many churches with his paintings, and distinguished himself in

that of the church of the Suffragio, which is his most finished

production. Anastasi di Sinigaglia was a painter less elegant and

finished, but free and spirited. His works are not scarce in that city,

and his best are the two historical subjects in the church della Croce.

Three pictures by him also in S. Lucia di Monte Alboddo, are highly

prized, and are called by the writer of the _Guida_, "_Capi d'opera

dell'Anastasi_." Camillo Scacciani, of Pesaro, called Carbone,

flourished at the beginning of the age we are writing on, and had a

Caracciesque style allied to the modern. There is a S. Andrea Avellino

by him in the Duomo of Pesaro; his other works are in private

collections. This notice I deem sufficient, always excepting the living

artists, whom I of course omit.[90]

Three masters who died successively in the pontificate of Pius VI. seem

to require from me more than a transient notice, and with them I shall

conclude the series of historical painters of the fifth epoch. I shall

first commemorate the Cav. Raffaello Mengs, from whom our posterity may

perhaps date a new and more happy era of the art. He was born in Saxony,

and brought to Rome by his father while yet a boy, and was at that time

skilled in miniature, and was a careful and correct draughtsman. On his

arrival in Rome, his father employed him in copying the works of

Raffaello, and chastised the young artist for every fault in his work,

with an incredible severity, or rather inhumanity, inflicting on him

even corporeal punishment, and reducing his allowance of food. Being

thus compelled to study perfection, and endowed with a genius to

appreciate it and perceive it, he acquired a consummate taste in art; he

communicated to Winckelmann very important materials for his _Storia

delle belle arti_, and was himself the author of many profound and

valuable essays on the fine arts, which have materially contributed to

improve the taste of the present age. They have different titles, but

all the same aim, the discrimination of the real perfection of art.[91]

The artist, as characterized by Mengs, may be compared to the orator of

Cicero, and both are endued by their authors with an ideal perfection,

such as the world has never seen, and will probably never see; and it is

the real duty of an instructor to recommend excellence, that in striving

to attain it, we may at least acquire a commendable portion of it.

Considered in this point of view, I should defend several of his

writings, where in the opinion of others he seems to assume a

dictatorial tone, in the judgment he passes on Guido, Domenichino, and

the Caracci; the very triumvirate whom he proposes as models in the art.

Mengs assuredly was not so infatuated as to hope to surpass these great

men, but because he knew that no one does so well but that it might be

done still better, he shews where they attained the summit of art, and

where they failed. The artist, therefore, described by Mengs, and to

whose qualifications he also aspired, and was anxious that all should do

the same, ought to unite in himself the design and beauty of the Greeks,

the expression and composition of Raffaello, the chiaroscuro and grace

of Coreggio, and, to complete all, the colouring of Titian. This union

of qualities Mengs has analyzed with equal elegance and perspicuity,

teaching the artist how to form himself on that ideal beauty, which is

itself never realised. If, on some occasions, he appears too

enthusiastic, or in some degree obscure, it cannot excite our surprise,

as he wrote in a foreign language, and was not much accustomed to

composition. His ideas therefore stood in need of a refined scholar to

render them clear and intelligible; and this advantage he would have

procured, had he been resolved to publish them; but his works are all

posthumous, and were given to the world by his excellency the Sig. Cav.

Azara. Hence it frequently happens in his works, that one treatise

destroys another, as Tiraboschi has observed in regard to his notice of

Coreggio, in his _Notizie degli Artefici Modenesi_; and hence concludes

that the _Riflessioni di Mengs su i tre gran Pittori_, where he finds

much to censure in Coreggio, were written by him before he saw the works

of that master; and that his _Memorie_ on the life of the same master,

where he extols Coreggio to the skies, and calls him the Apelles of

modern painting, were written after having seen and studied him.[92] In

spite however of all objections, he will retain a distinguished place,

as well among the theorists or writers, as among professors themselves,

as long as the art endures.

We perhaps should not say that Mengs was a whetstone which gave a new

quality to the steel, which it could not otherwise have acquired; but

that he was the steel itself, which becomes brighter and finer the more

it is used. He became painter to the court of Dresden; every fresh work

gave proof of his progress in the art. He went afterwards to Madrid,

where in the chambers of the royal palace he painted the assembly of the

Gods, the Seasons, and the various parts of the day, in an enchanting

manner. After repairing a second time to Rome to renew his studies, he

again returned to Madrid, where he painted in one of the saloons the

Apotheosis of Trajan, and in a theatre, Time subduing Pleasure; pictures

much superior to his former pieces. In Rome there are three large works

by him; the painting in the vault of S. Eusebio; the Parnassus in the

saloon of the Villa Albani, far superior to the preceding one;[93] and

lastly, the cabinet of manuscripts in the Vatican was painted by him,

where the celestial forms of the angels, the majesty of Moses, and the

dignified character of S. Peter, the enchanting colour, the relief, and

the harmony, contribute to render this chamber one of the most

remarkable in Rome for its beautiful decorations. This constant

endeavour to surpass himself, would be evident also from his easel

pictures, if they were not so rare in Italy; as he painted many of this

description for London and the other capitals of Europe. In Rome itself,

where he studied young, where he long resided, to which he always

returned, and where at last he died, there are few of his works to be

found. We may enumerate the portrait of Clement XIII. and his nephew

Carlo, in the collection of the prince Rezzonico; that of Cardinal

Zelada, secretary of state; and a few other pieces, in the possession of

private gentlemen, more particularly the Sig. Cav. Azara. Florence has

some large compositions by him in the Palazzo Pitti, and his own

portrait in the cabinet of painters, besides the great Deposition from

the Cross in chiaroscuro, for the Marchese Rinuccini, which he was

prevented by death from colouring; and a beautiful Genius in fresco in a

chamber of the Sig. Conte Senatore Orlando Malevolti del Benino.

Returning from the consideration of his works to Mengs himself, I leave

to others to estimate his merit, and to determine how far his principles

are just.[94] As far as regards myself, I cannot but extol that

inextinguishable ardour of improving himself by which he was

particularly distinguished, and which prompted him, even while he

enjoyed the reputation of a first rate master, to proceed in every work

as if he were only commencing his career. Truth was his great aim, and

he diligently studied the works of the first luminaries of the art,

analysed their colours, and examined them in detail, till he entered

fully into the spirit and design of those great models. Whilst employed

in the ducal gallery in Florence, he did not touch a pencil, until he

had attentively studied the best pieces there, and particularly the

Venus of Titian in the tribune. In his hours of leisure he employed

himself in carefully studying the fresco pictures of the best masters of

that school, which is so distinguished in this art. He was accustomed to

do the same by every work of celebrity which fell in his way, whether

ancient or modern; all contributed to his improvement, and to carry him

nearer to perfection; he was in short a man of a most aspiring mind, and

may be compared to the ancient, who declared that he wished "to die

learning." If maxims like these were enforced, what rapid strides in the

art might we not expect!

But the greater part of artists form for themselves a manner which may

attract popularity, and then relax their efforts, satisfied with the

applause of the crowd; and if they feel the necessity of improving, it

is not with a design of acquiring a just reputation, but of adding to

the price of their works.

Notwithstanding the considerable space which Mengs has occupied in our

time, he has nevertheless left room for the celebrity of Pompeo Batoni,

of Luca. The Cav. Boni, who has honoured this artist with an elegant

eulogium, thus expresses himself in comparing him with Mengs. "The

latter," he says, "was the painter of philosophy, the former of nature.

Batoni had a natural taste which led him to the beautiful without

effort; Mengs attained the same object by reflection and study. Grace

was the gift of nature in Batoni, as it had formerly been in Apelles;

while the higher attributes of the art were allotted to Mengs, as they

were in former days to Protogenes. Perhaps the first was more painter

than philosopher, the second more philosopher than painter. The latter,

perhaps, was more sublime, but more studied; Batoni less profound, but

more natural. Not that I would insinuate that nature was sparing to

Mengs, or that Batoni was devoid of the necessary science of the art,

&c." If it were ever said with truth of any artist, that he was born a

painter, this distinction must be allowed to Batoni. He learned only the

principles of the art in his native country, and of the two

correspondents from whom I have received my information, the one

considers him to have been the scholar of Brugieri, the other of

Lombardi, as already mentioned, vol. i. p. 360, and probably he was

instructed by both. He came young to Rome, and did not frequent any

particular school, but studied and copied Raffaello and the old masters

with unceasing assiduity, and thus learnt the great secret of copying

nature with truth and judgment.

That boundless and instructive volume, open to all, but cultivated by

few, was rightly appreciated by Batoni, and it was hence that he derived

that beautiful variety in his heads and contours, which are sometimes

wanting even in the great masters, who were occasionally too much

addicted to the ideal. Hence, too, he derived the gestures and

expressions most appropriate to each subject. Persuaded that a vivid

imagination was not alone sufficient to depict those fine traits in

which the sublimity of the art consists, he did not adopt any attitudes

which were not found in nature. He took from nature the first ideas,

copied from her every part of the figure, and adapted the drapery and

folds from models. He afterwards embellished and perfected his work with

a natural taste, and enlivened all with a style of colour peculiarly his

own; clear, engaging, lucid, and preserving after the lapse of many

years, as in the picture of various saints at S. Gregorio, all its

original freshness. This was in him not so much an art as the natural

ebullition of his genius. He sported with his pencil. Every path was

open to him; painting in various ways, now with great force, now with a

touch, and now finishing all by strokes. Sometimes he destroyed the

whole work, and gave it the requisite force by a line.[95] Although he

was not a man of letters, he yet shows himself a poet in conception,

both in a sublime and playful style. One example from a picture in the

possession of his heirs, will suffice. Wishing to express the dreams of

an enamoured girl, he has represented her wrapped in soft slumbers, and

surrounded by loves, two of whom present to her splendid robes and

jewels, and a third approaches her with arrows in his hand, while she,

captivated by the vision, smiles in her sleep. Many of these poetical

designs, and many historical subjects, are in private collections, and

in the courts of Europe, from which he had constant commissions.

Batoni possessed an extraordinary talent for portrait painting, and had

the honour of being employed by three pontiffs in that branch of the

art, Benedict XIV., Clement XIII., and Pius VI.; to whom may be added,

the emperor Joseph II. and his august brother and successor, Leopold

II., the Grand Duke of Muscovy, and the Grand Duchess, besides numerous

private individuals. He for some time painted miniatures, and

transferred that care and precision which is essential in that branch to

his larger productions, without attenuating his style by hardness. We

find an extraordinary proof of this in his altarpieces, spread over

Italy, and mentioned by us in many cities, particularly in Lucca. Of

those that remain in Rome, Mengs gave the preference to S. Celso, which

is over the great altar of that church. Another picture, the Fall of

Simon Magus, is in the church of the Certosa. It was intended to have

been copied in mosaic for the Vatican, and to have been substituted for

a picture of the same subject by Vanni, the only one in that church on

stone. But the mosaic, from some cause or other, was not executed.

Perhaps the subject displeased, from not being evangelical, and the idea

of removing the picture of Vanni not being resumed, the subject was

changed, and a commission given to Mengs to paint the Government of the

church conferred on S. Peter. He made a sketch for it in chiaroscuro

with great care, which is in the Palazzo Chigi, but did not live to

finish it in colours. This sketch evinces a design and composition

superior to the picture of Batoni, but the subject of the latter was

more vigorously conceived. At all events, however, Batoni must

henceforth be considered the restorer of the Roman School, in which he

lived until his 79th year, and educated many pupils in his profession.

The example of the two last eminent artists was not lost on Antonio

Cavallucci da Sermoneta, whose name when I began to print this volume, I

did not expect would here have found a place. But having recently died,

some notice is due to his celebrity, as he is already ranked with the

first artists of his day. He was highly esteemed both in Rome and

elsewhere. The Primaziale of Pisa, who in the choice of their artists

consulted no recommendation but that of character, employed him on a

considerable work, representing S. Bona of that city taking the

religious habit. It breathes a sacred piety, which he himself both felt

and expressed in a striking manner. In this picture he wished to shew

that the examples of christian humility, such as burying in a cloister

the gifts of nature and fortune, are susceptible of the gayest

decoration. This he effected by introducing a train of noble men and

women, who, according to custom, assisted in the solemnity. In this

composition, in which he follows the principles of Batoni rather than

those of Mengs, we may perceive both his study of nature, and his

judgment and facility in imitating her. Another large picture of the

saints Placido and Mauro, he sent into Catania, and another of S.

Francesco di Paola, he executed for the church of Loreto, and which was

copied in mosaic. In Rome are his S. Elias and the Purgatorio, two

pictures placed at S. Martino a' Monti, and many works in the possession

of the noble family of Gaetani, who were the first to encourage and

support this artist. His last work was the Venus and Ascanius, in the

Palazzo Cesarini, which has been described to me as a beautiful

production by the Sig. Gio. Gherardo de' Rossi, who has declared his

intention of publishing the life of Cavallucci, which will no doubt be

done in his usual masterly manner.

The History of Painting in Italy, Vol. 2 (of 6) From the Period of the Revival of the Fine Arts to the End of the Eighteenth Century · 第 19 / 28 段