Produced by Barbara Tozier, Carol Brown, Bill Tozier and
the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net
THE
HISTORY OF PAINTING
IN
ITALY.
VOL. III.
THE
HISTORY OF PAINTING
IN
ITALY,
FROM THE PERIOD OF THE REVIVAL OF
THE FINE ARTS,
TO THE END OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY:
TRANSLATED
From the Original Italian
OF THE
ABATE LUIGI LANZI.
BY THOMAS ROSCOE.
_IN SIX VOLUMES._
VOL. III.
CONTAINING THE SCHOOL OF VENICE.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR
W. SIMPKIN AND R. MARSHALL,
STATIONERS'-HALL COURT, LUDGATE STREET.
1828.
J. M'Creery, Tooks Court,
Chancery-lane, London.
CONTENTS
OF
THE THIRD VOLUME.
HISTORY OF PAINTING IN UPPER ITALY.
BOOK THE FIRST.
VENETIAN SCHOOL.
Page
EPOCH I. _The old masters_ 1
EPOCH II. _Giorgione, Titian, Tintoretto, Jacopo da
Bassano, Paolo Veronese_ 91
EPOCH III. _Innovations of the mannerists of the seventeenth
century. Corruption of Venetian
painting_ 254
EPOCH IV. _Of exotic and new styles in Venice_ 347
HISTORY OF PAINTING
IN
UPPER ITALY.
BOOK I.
VENETIAN SCHOOL.
This School would have required no farther illustration from any other
pen, had Signor Antonio Zanetti, in his highly esteemed work upon
Venetian Painting, included a more ample consideration of the artists of
the state, instead of confining his attention wholly to those, whose
productions, ornamenting the churches and other public places, had all
been completed in the city of Venice alone. He has, nevertheless,
rendered distinguished service to any one ambitious of succeeding him,
and of extending the same subject beyond these narrower limits; since he
has observed the most lucid order in the arrangement of epochs, in the
description of styles, in estimating the merits of various painters, and
thus ascertaining the particular rank as well as the age belonging to
each. Those artists then, whom he has omitted to commemorate, may be
easily reduced under one or other of the divisions pointed out by him,
and the whole history enlarged upon the plan which he first laid down.
In cultivating an acquaintance with these additional names, the
memorials collected by Vasari; afterwards, on a more extensive scale, by
the Cavaliere Ridolfi, in his Lives of the Venetian Painters; and by
Boschini, in the _Miniere della Pittura_, in the _Carta del Navegar
Pittoresco_, and in other works: materials drawn from all parts of the
Venetian state--will be of signal advantage to us. No one, it is hoped,
will feel displeased at the introduction of the name of Vasari, against
whom the historians of the Venetian School were louder in their
complaints than even those of the Roman, the Siennese, and the
Neapolitan Schools; all whose causes of difference I have elsewhere
recounted, adding to them, whenever I found them admissible, my own
refutations. These it would be needless now to repeat, in reply to the
Venetian writers. I shall merely observe that Vasari bestowed very ample
commendations upon the Venetian professors, in different parts of his
history, and more particularly in the lives of Carpaccio, of Liberale,
and of Pordenone. Let me add that if he was occasionally betrayed into
errors, either from want of more correct information, or from a degree
of jealousy or spirit of patriotic rivalry, which probably may have
secretly influenced him in his opinions, it will be no difficult task in
the present enlightened period,[1] to substitute the real names, more
exact accounts, and more impartial examinations of the earlier
professors of the school.[2]
In respect to the more modern, up to whose period he did not reach, I
possess historical matter, which, if not very copious, is certainly less
scanty than such as relates to many of the other Schools of Italy.
Besides Ridolfi, Boschini, and Zanetti, it includes the historians of
the particular cities, the same from whom Orlandi selected his various
notices of artists; and among whom none is to be preferred to Signor
Zamboni for the fulness and authenticity of his materials, in his work,
entitled _Fabbriche di Brescia_. I am, moreover, in possession of
several authors who have distinctly treated of the lives, or published
other accounts of those who flourished in their own cities;--such as the
Commendatore del Pozzo, in his notice of the Veronese,[3] Count Tassi of
those of Bergamo, and Signor Verci of the Bassanese artists. And no
slight assistance may also be drawn from the different "_Guides_," or
descriptions of paintings, exhibited in many cities of the state,
although they are far from being all of equal merit. There is the "Guida
Trevigiana," of Rigamonti, that of Vicenza printed by Vendramini Mosca,
that of Brescia by Carboni, and that of Verona, expressly drawn from the
"_Verona Illustrata_" of the Marquis Maffei, with the still more
valuable one of Venice, dated 1733, from the able pen of Antonio M.
Zanetti. To these we may likewise add that first published by Rossetti,
now revised and improved by Brandolese, abounding with historical
memoirs of the painters of Padua; and the Guide of Rovigo by Bartoli,
communicating much new and interesting information, which serves to
point out more accurately certain eras among the professors of the art,
while the same may, in part, be observed of that of Bergamo, by the
Dottore Pasta. Nor are these all; for I am not a little indebted to
several notices published in the "Elogj" of Signor Longhi, and in some
of the catalogues of private collections; besides other anecdotes, in
part collected by myself, in part[4] communicated by my friends, and in
particular by the very accomplished Sig. Gio. Maria Sasso,[5] who has
already promised to gratify us with his "Venezia Pittrice," accompanied
with designs of the most esteemed paintings of this school, accurately
engraved.
[Footnote 1: It is observed by Signor Bottari, that Giorgio, in his life
of Franco, was too sparing of his praises of Tintoret and Paul Veronese;
and the same might be said also of Gambera, and many others, who
flourished at the same period, or were already deceased when he wrote.
To his opinions have succeeded those of the Caracci, and of many other
distinguished professors of the art, which may be safely relied upon.]
[Footnote 2: There very opportunely appeared, in the year 1800, at
Bassano, a "Notizia d'Opere di Disegno"--"Upon works of Design," the
anonymous production, apparently, of some inhabitant of Padua, about
1550. It was published and illustrated by the learned Abbate Morelli,
and contains several anecdotes, relating more particularly to the
Venetian School.]
[Footnote 3: The celebrated painter, Cignaroli, besides drawing up a
complete _Catalogue raisonne_, of the painters of Verona, already
published in the Chronicle of Zagata, vol. iii., left behind him MS.
notes upon the entire work of Pozzo, in the margin.]
[Footnote 4: I have been enabled in this edition, by means of Count Cav.
de Lazzara, to avail myself of a MS. from the pen of Natal Melchiori,
entitled, "_Lives of the Venetian Painters_," drawn up in 1728. The
author is deserving of credit, no less on account of having been himself
a painter, than from his personal acquaintance with the chief part of
those whose lives he commemorated.]
[Footnote 5: This excellent man is now no more, and his work has not
hitherto appeared. That, however, by the Sig. Co. Canonico de Rinaldis,
on the painters of Friuli, we have received. It embraces a much more
correct and enlarged view of that noble school, than we before possessed
in the scantier notices from the pen of Altan. Still he is not always
exact, and he would undoubtedly have written better, had he seen more.
At length, however, we are in possession of the work of Padre M.
Federici, in two volumes, relating to the artists of the "Marca
Trevigiana," accompanied by documents; a work better calculated than the
former to satisfy the expectations of a reader of taste. But, as is
generally the case, when an author hazards new opinions, we are
sometimes compelled to suspend our assent to his conclusions.]
VENETIAN SCHOOL.
EPOCH I.
_The Ancients._
If in the outset of each school of painting I were to pursue the example
held up in the _Etruria Pittrice_, of introducing the account of its
pictures by that of some work in mosaic, I ought here to mention those
of Grado, wrought in the sixth century, distinguished by the name of the
Patriarch Elia, those of Torcello, and a few other specimens that
appeared at Venice, in the islands, and in Terra Firma, produced at
periods subsequent to the increase of the edifices, together with the
grandeur of the Venetian state. But admitting that these mosaics, like
many at Rome, may really be the production of the Greeks; the title of
my work, confined as it is to painting, and to the period of its revival
in Italy, leads me to be little solicitous respecting those more ancient
monuments of the fine arts, remnants of which are to be found scattered
here and there, without any series of a school. I shall still, however,
occasionally allude to them, according as I find needful, were it only
for the sake of illustration and comparison, as I proceed. But such
information ought to be sought for in other works; mine professes only
to give the history of painting from the period of its revival.
The most ancient pictorial remains in the Venetian territories I believe
to be at Verona, in a subterraneous part of the nunnery of Santi Nazario
and Celso, which, however inaccessible to the generality of virtuosi,
have, nevertheless, been engraved on a variety of plates by order of the
indefatigable Signor Dionisi. In this, which was formerly the Chapel of
the Faithful, are represented several mysteries of our redemption; some
apostles, some holy martyrs, and in particular the transit of one of the
righteous from this life, on whom the archangel, St. Michael, is seen
bestowing his assistance. Here the symbols, the workmanship, the design,
the attitudes, the drapery of the figures, and the characters united,
permit us not to doubt that the painting must be much anterior to the
revival of the arts in Italy. But most writers seem to trace the
rudiments of Venetian painting from the eleventh century, about the year
1070, at the period when the Doge Selvo invited the mosaic workers from
Greece to adorn the magnificent temple, consecrated to St. Mark the
Evangelist. Such artificers, however rude, must have been acquainted, in
some degree, with the art of painting; none being enabled to work in
mosaic who had not previously designed and coloured, upon pasteboard or
cartoon, the composition they intended to execute.
And these, observe the same writers, were the first essays of the art of
painting in Venice. However this may be, it speedily took root, and
began to flourish after the year 1204, when Constantinople being taken,
Venice was in a short time filled, not indeed with Grecian artists, but
with their pictures, statues, and bassi relievi.[6] Had I not here
restricted my observations to existing specimens of the art, bestowing
only a rapid glance upon the rest, along with their authors, I might
prove, that from the above period, the city was no longer destitute of
artists; and was enabled, in the thirteenth century, to form a company
of them with their appropriate laws and institutions.
But of these elder masters of the art, there remains either only the
name, as of a Giovanni da Venezia and a Martinello da Bassano, or some
solitary relic of their labours without a name, as in the sarcophagus,
in wood, of the Beata Giuliana, painted about the year 1262, the same in
which she died. This monument remains in her own monastery of San Biagio
alla Guidecca, long held in veneration, even after the body of the
blessed saint had been removed, in the year 1297, into an urn of stone.
There are there represented San Biagio, the titular saint of the church,
San Cataldo, the bishop, and the blessed Giuliana, the two former in an
upright, the latter in a kneeling posture; their names are written in
Latin, and the style, although coarse, is nevertheless not Greek.
Probably that of the painter is also in the same corner, a picture of
whom, a Pieta, has recently been discovered by the Ab. Boni, who
considers him a new Cimabue of the Venetian art. As it has already been
described by him in his Florentine collection of "Opuscoli
Scientifici,"[7] I shall not extend my account of it; for the reader
will there find other names, as will afterwards be shewn, recently
discovered by the indefatigable author of some early Venetian writers,
until this period unknown to history. Among these are Stefano Pievano,
of S. Agnese, a picture by whom, dated 1381, is described; Alberegno,
belonging to the fifteenth century, and one Esegrenio, who flourished
somewhat later, to which time we may refer two fine and highly valued
figures of holy virgins, not long since discovered, of Tommaso da
Modena, and which, from the disputes they have elicited, have been
subjected to experiments at Florence, to ascertain whether they are
painted in oil or distemper--experiments that tend only to prove that
this Tommaso was unacquainted with the art of colouring in oil.
It was only subsequent to the year 1300, that the names, united to the
productions of the Venetians, began to make themselves manifest; when,
partly by the examples held out by Giotto, partly by their own assiduity
and talent, the painters of the city and of the state visibly improved,
and softened the harshness of their manner. Giotto, according to a MS.
cited by Rossetti,[8] was at Padua in 1306; according to Vasari, he
returned from Avignon in 1316; and a little while afterwards he was
painting at Verona, in the palace of Can della Scala, and at Padua,
employed on a chapel in the church of the titular saint. He adds, that
towards the close of his days he was again invited there, and
embellished other places with his pieces. Nothing, however, remains of
him in Verona; but in Padua there still exists the chapel of the
Nunziata all'Arena, divided all round into compartments, in each of
which is represented some scriptural event. It is truly surprising to
behold, not less on account of its high state of preservation, beyond
any other of his frescos, than for its full expression of native grace,
together with that air of grandeur which Giotto so well knew how to
unite. With respect to the chapel, it is believed that Vasari was less
accurately informed, inasmuch as Savonarola, who has been cited by Sig.
Morelli,[9] relates that Giotto ornamented the little church of the
Arena, _capitulumque Antonii nostri_, and the chapter _of our St.
Antony_. And in fact, in the apartment of the chapter house, there yet
remain several traces of ancient painting, though turned white with age.
In a very ancient MS., of the year 1312,[10] there is made mention of
his also having been employed _in Palatio Comitis_, which others suppose
ought to be read _Communis_, intended to apply to the Saloon, of which I
shall shortly have to give some account.
To Giotto succeeded Giusto Padovano, so called from the place of his
naturalization and usual residence; being, in truth, a Florentine,
sprung from the family of the Menabuoi. As a disciple of Giotto, Vasari
attributes to him the very extensive work which adorns the church of St.
John the Baptist. In the picture over the altar, if it be his, Giusto
has exhibited various histories of St. John the Baptist; on the walls
are represented both scriptural events and mysteries of the Apocalypse;
and on the cupola he has drawn a Choir of Angels, where we behold, as if
in a grand consistory, the blessed arrayed in various garments, seated
upon the ground; simple, indeed, in its conception, but executed with an
incredible degree of diligence and felicity. It is mentioned in the
_Notizia Morelli_, that formerly there was to be read there an
inscription over one of the gates--_Opus Johannis et Antonii de
Padua_,--probably companions of Giusto, and, probably, as is conjectured
by the author of the MS. above alluded to, the painters of the whole
temple. This would seem to augment the number of the Paduan artists, no
less than the imitators of Giotto; since the works, already described,
are equally as much in his manner as those by Taddeo Gaddi, or any other
of his fellow pupils in Florence. The same commendation is bestowed upon
Jacopo Davanzo, of whom I treat more at length in the school of Bologna.
A less faithful follower of Giotto was Guariento, a Paduan, held in high
esteem about the year 1360, as appears from the honourable commissions
he obtained from the Venetian senate. One of his frescos and a
crucifixion yet remain at Bassano;[11] and in the choir of the
Eremitani, at Padua, there are many of his figures now retouched, from
which Zanetti took occasion to commend him for his rich invention, the
spirit of his attitudes, and the felicity with which, at so early a
period, he disposed his draperies. At Padua there is an ancient church,
dedicated to St. George, erected about 1377, which boasts some history
pieces of St. James, executed by the hand of Alticherio, or Aldigieri,
da Zevio in the Veronese; and others of St. John, the work of one
Sebeto,[12] says the historian, a native of Verona. These, likewise,
approach pretty nearly the style of Giotto, and more especially the
first, who painted also a good deal in his native place.
To these two I may add Jacopo da Verona, known only by his numerous
paintings in fresco at San Michele of Padua, which remain in part
entire; and Taddeo Bartoli, of Siena, who has shewn himself ambitious at
the Arena, of emulating the contiguous labours of Giotto, without
attaining the object in view. Another production of the same period is
seen in the great hall at Padua, reported to be one of the largest in
the world, consisting, as it does, of a mixture of sacred historic
pieces, of celestial signs borrowed from Igino, and of the various
operations carried on during the respective months of the year, besides
several other ideas certainly furnished by some learned man of that age.
It is partly the work, says Morelli in his _Notizia_, upon the authority
of Campagnuola, of an artist of Ferrara, and partly that of Gio.
Miretto, a Paduan. This recent discovery justifies my own previous
opinions, having been unable to prevail upon myself to ascribe such a
production to Giotto, although it partakes strongly of his style, which
appears to have spread pretty rapidly throughout the territories of
Padua, of Verona, of Bergamo, and great part of the Terra Ferma.
Besides this manner, which may be, in some measure, pronounced foreign,
there are others equally observable in Venice, no less than in Treviso,
in the Chapter of the Padri Predicatori, and in other of the subject
cities, and these might more accurately be termed national, so remote
are they from the style of Giotto, and that of his disciples before
mentioned. I have elsewhere pointed out how far the miniature painters
contributed to this degree of originality, a class of artists, with whom
Italy, at no time destitute, more fully abounded about that period,
while they still continued to improve by employing their talents in
drawing objects from the life, and not from any Greek or Italian model.
Indeed they had already made no slight advances in every branch of
painting, when Giotto first arrived in those parts. I have myself seen,
in the grand collection of MSS., made in Venice, by the Abbate Canonici,
a book of the Evangelists, obtained in Udine, illustrated with
miniatures in pretty good taste for the thirteenth century, in which
they were produced; and similar relics are by no means rare throughout
the libraries of the state. I suspect, therefore, that many of those new
painters, either having been pupils of the miniaturists, or induced to
imitate them from the near connexion between the arts, attempted to vie
with them in design, in the distribution of their colours, and in their
compositions. Hence, it is clearly accounted for, why they did not
become the disciples, though acquainted with the works of Giotto, but
produced several respectable pieces of their own.
To this class belongs M. Paolo, whom Zanetti found recorded in an
ancient parchment, bearing the date of 1346. He is the earliest in the
national manner, of whom there exists a work with the indisputable name
of its author. It is to be seen in the great church of St. Mark,
consisting of a tablet, or, as it is otherwise called, _Ancona_, divided
into several compartments, representing the figure of a dead Christ,
with some of the Apostles, and historic incidents from the holy
Evangelist. There is inscribed underneath--_Magister Paulus cum Jacobo,
et Johanne filiis fecit hoc opus_; and Signor Zanetti, page 589,
observes in regard to it as follows:--_Among the specimens of simple
painting, in St. Mark's, the ball centre of the great altar is
remarkable for several small tablets of gold and silver, on which are
painted several figures in the ancient Greek manner. San Pietro Urseolo
had it constructed about the year 980, at Constantinople, and it was
removed to this place in the time of the Doge Ordelafo Faliero, in 1102,
though it was afterwards renovated by command of the Doge Pietro Ziani,
in 1209._ This historian did not discover the inscription which I found
upon it in the year 1782. The artist is sufficiently distinguished for
the period in which he flourished, although the stiffness in the design,
false action, and expression, beyond those of the best followers of
Giotto, are perceptible, so much as to remind us of the Greek specimens
of art.[13]
There can, likewise, be no doubt, that a painter of the name of Lorenzo,
was one of these Venetians, whose altarpiece in St. Antony of Castello,
to which is attached his name, with the date of 1358, _paid him three
hundred gold ducats_, has been commended by Zanetti. Besides, we read
inscribed on a picture belonging to the noble house of Ercolani, at
Bologna, the words MANU LAURENTII DE VENETIIS, 1368; and there is every
appearance of his being the author of the fresco in the church of
Mezzaratta, not far from Bologna, representing Daniel in the lions' den;
and bearing the signature of _Laurentius, P._ It is a work that bears no
resemblance to the style of Giotto, and appears to have been completed
about the year 1370. It is equally certain that Niccolo Semitecolo was a
Venetian, he having also inscribed his name as we find it written upon a
TRINITY, which represents the Virgin, along with some histories of St.
Sebastian, still preserved in the chapter library of Padua:--"Nicoleto
Semitecolo da Veniexia impense, 1367." The work is an excellent specimen
of this school; the naked parts are tolerably well drawn, and the
proportions of the figures, though sometimes extravagantly so, are bold
and free; and what is more important to our present purpose, it
discovers no resemblance to the style of Giotto, being inferior in point
of design, though equal to him in regard to the colouring. Two other
painters, whose style betrays nothing of Giotto, were discovered by
Signor Sasso, in Venice, upon the strength of two altarpieces, to which
they had affixed their names. Upon one, found in the convent of _Corpus
Domini_, he read _Angelus pinxit_; and upon the other, also in the same
place, _Katarinus pinxit_. While on this subject, I ought not to pass
over the opinion of Baldinucci himself, who always appears to have
respected the freedom and independence of the Venetian as opposed to the
Florentine school, by refusing to insert the name of a single Venetian
in his tree of Cimabue. He merely maintained, that the Venetian painters
had improved their style by the labours of Angiol Gaddi, and of one
Antonio, a Venetian, whom, in spite of the authority of Vasari, he has
declared to be a Florentine; on which point we must refer to what has
already been stated in the first volume (p. 61) of this work. Moreover,
he asserts of the same Antonio, that he took up his residence at Venice,
and thence acquired the appellation of Veneziano; but that he took his
departure again, owing to the intrigues of the national professors, as
much as to say, of a school formed anterior to his arrival. And so long
anterior was it, indeed, that the whole state, as well as the adjacent
places, abounded not less with pictures than with pupils, although few
of their names with their productions have survived.[14]
Among these few is a Simon da Cusighe, who painted an altarpiece and a
fresco, still remaining in his native parish, situated near the city of
Belluno, where there exist memorials of one Pietro, and other artists of
the thirteenth century, along with some very tolerably executed figures,
bearing the epigraph of _Simon pinxit_. To these I add a native of
Friuli, of whom there are no authentic remains beyond Gemona, where he
painted the facade of the dome, and under a picture of the martyrdom of
I know not what saint, appears his name written, MCCCXXXII. MAGISTER
NICOLAUS PINTOR ME FECIT. To this artist is ascribed, by some writers,
that vast and meritorious production, still in such a fine state of
preservation, ornamenting the dome of Venzone, and which represents the
solemn scene of the Consecration; but its author is a matter of mere
conjecture, founded in this instance upon the vicinity of the place and
time, and resemblance of manner. There are also Pecino and Pietro de
Nova, who employed their talents, during a period of many years
subsequent to 1363, in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, at Bergamo.
But these, like the artist of Padua before mentioned, approach very
nearly the composition of Giotto, and possibly might have imbibed such a
taste at Milan.[15]
The splendor of Venetian painting becomes more strikingly manifest in
the fifteenth century; a period that was gradually preparing the way for
the grand manner of the Titians and the Giorgioni. The new style took
its rise in one of the islands called Murano; but it was destined to
attain its perfection in Venice. I first recognized the work of one of
the oldest of these artists, subscribing himself, _Quiricius de
Muriano_, in the studio of Signor Sasso. It represents our Saviour in a
sitting posture, at whose feet stands a veiled devotee; but there is no
mark by which to ascertain its age. There is, likewise, of uncertain
date, yet still very ancient, a Bernardino da Murano, of whose
productions Zanetti saw nothing more than a rude altarpiece. An Andrea
da Murano flourished about the period 1400, whose style, whatever it may
retain of harsh and dry, neither superior in composition, nor in choice
of features to that of his predecessors, discovers him to have been
tolerably skilful in design, even in regard to the extremities, and in
placing his figures well in the canvass.
There remains in his native place, at San Pier Martire, an altarpiece
painted by his hand, in which a St. Sebastian forms so conspicuous a
figure for the beauty of its torso, that Zanetti suspects it must have
been copied from some ancient statue. It is he who introduced the art
into the house of the Vivarini, his compatriots, who in a continued line
of succession preserved the school of Murano for nearly a century; and
who produced as rich a harvest of their labours in Venice, as did the
Campi afterwards in the city of Cremona, or the Procaccini in Milan. I
shall treat of them with brevity, but with such new sources of
information, as will at once serve to correct and amplify what has
already been written.
The first among the Vivarini mentioned by historians is Luigi, of whom a
painting at Santi Giovanni e Paolo, has been cited by them, which
represents our Redeemer bearing the cross upon his shoulders. The work
has been a good deal retouched, and there has been added to it another
portion, which gives the name of the author, dated 1414. Not being an
autograph, we are led to suspect some kind of mistake attaching either
to the name or the date; there having been another Luigi Vivarini, as we
shall shew, towards the close of the century. The one in question, then,
might probably be an ancestor of the latter, though it be difficult to
persuade ourselves of it, as there remains no other superscription, or
notice of any of that name so ancient.
Next to this artist, according to Ridolfo and Zanetti, are to be
enumerated Giovanni and Antonio Vivarini, who flourished about the year
1440. The authority they adduce for this, is an altarpiece in San
Pantaleone, which bears the inscription of _Zuane e Antonio da Muran
pense 1444_. But this Giovanni,[16] if I mistake not, is the same who
signs his name on another picture in Venice, _Joannes de Alemania et
Antonius de Muriano pinxit_; or as it is thus written in Padua, _Antonio
de Muran e Zohan Alamanus pinxit_. Giovanni, therefore, was a companion
of Antonio, a German by birth; and traces of a foreign style are clearly
perceptible in his paintings. The reason of his omitting to insert his
birthplace in the picture at San Pantaleone, arose, I suspect, from the
fact of his name and acquaintance with Antonio being too well known to
admit of doubt. After the year 1447 there is no more mention made of
Giovanni, but only of Antonio; sometimes alone, sometimes together with
some other of the Vivarini. Thus, his name is subscribed alone in San
Antonio Abate di Pesaro, upon an altarpiece of the titular saint,
surrounded by the figures of three young martyrs, with some smaller
paintings attached; the production of a very animated colourist, and
displaying forms inferior to none in the school of Murano. I have seen
two other specimens, in which he is mentioned together with a second
Vivarino. The least excellent of these is to be found in San Francesco
Grande, at Padua, consisting of a Madonna, with some saints, in various
compartments; and, at the foot of it, is the following memorandum, _Anno
1451, Antonius et Bartholomeus fratres de Murano pinxerunt hoc opus_.
Similar to this, the two brothers had produced another the year
preceding, in the Certosa of Bologna, where it is still in a high state
of preservation, beyond any other specimen I have seen belonging to this
family. There is much worthy of commendation in each figure of the whole
piece; features dignified and devout; appropriate dresses; care in the
disposition of the hair and beards, united to a colouring warm and
brilliant.
According to what appears, Bartolommeo must have been held of less
account than Antonio, until the discovery of painting in oil being
introduced into Venice, he became one among the first to profit by it,
and, towards the period in which the two Bellini appeared, was held in
pretty high repute.
The first specimen of his painting in oil exists at S. Giovanni e Paolo,
not far from the gate, and exhibits, among other saints, P. San
Agostino, with an indication of the year 1473. From that period he
continued to distinguish himself, producing a great number of pieces
both in oil and in water colour, sometimes with more, and sometimes with
less care, but always in the ancient taste for subdividing the
altarpiece into several parts, in each of which he represented separate
heads or entire figures. In these he often marked the name of Vivarino,
with the year of their production; and occasionally he has added a finch
or linnet by way of allusion to his family name. His last work, bearing
the date of the year, is a Christ risen from the dead, at San Giovanni,
in Bragora, where Boschini read the date of 1498, which is now no longer
apparent; but it is a piece which, in every part, may be said to vie
with that of the best Venetian artists who flourished during the same
period.
Contemporary with him was a Luigi of the same name, one of whose
productions was seen by Zanetti, in a collection of paintings, with the
date of 1490, and as appeared to him, strongly approaching, in point of
taste, to the best style of Bartolommeo. To Luigi, also, must
undoubtedly be ascribed the altarpiece, which, in San Francesco di
Trevigi, bears his name. There is another at the Battuti, in Belluno,
representing the saints Piero, Girolamo, and some others, a work which
cost that school 100 gold ducats, besides the expenses of the artist,
who has attached to it his name. But superior to every other of his
existing specimens, is that fine picture in the school of San Girolamo,
at Venice, in which he represented a history of the titular saint, in
emulation of Giovanni Bellino, whom he here equalled, and of Carpaccio,
whom he surpassed. He has drawn the saint in the act of caressing a
lion, while several monks are seen flying in terror at the sight. The
composition is very fine; the passions are tolerably well pourtrayed,
the colours as soft and delicate as in any other of the Vivarini; the
architecture solid, and in the ancient taste, while the epoch is more
modern than that which could be ascribed to the supposed Luigi, the
elder. Such is our exposition of the whole series of the School of
Murano, up to the period of its greatest improvement, so as to bring it
under one point of view. I shall now, therefore, resume the thread of my
narrative, relating to the elder artists of the fourteenth century, who
competed with the oldest of the school of Murano, until the era of
painting in oil; and I shall afterwards proceed to treat apart of the
more modern.
In the early part of the century, an artist of the name of Gentile da
Fabriano, had been employed in the public palace at Venice, highly
distinguished in his time, but of whom I must not here repeat what has
been said in the first volume of this work. He there depicted a naval
battle scene, a production greatly extolled in former times, which has
long since perished. He produced, also, some disciples, as we find
mention of a Jacopo Nerito, from Padua, who, in a painting at San
Michele di Padova, according to Rossetti, subscribes himself one of his
pupils. Nasocchio di Bassano, the elder, is to be ranked also, either as
one of his scholars or his imitators, if, indeed, a small picture
pointed out to me by the late Signor Verci was by his hand.
Among other Venetians, Jacopo Bellini, at once the father and the master
of Gentile and Giovanni of the same name, of whom more hereafter, was
certainly a pupil of Gentile da Fabriano. Jacopo, however, is better
known by the celebrity of his sons, than by his own works, at this time
either destroyed or unknown. He had painted in the school of S. Giovanni
Evangelista at Venice, and in the chapel of the Gatta Melata, at the
Santo di Padova, about 1456; but these labours survive only in history,
nor have I met with any other specimen besides a Madonna, discovered by
Sig. Sasso, bearing the signature of its author. The style appears taken
from that of Squarcione, to which he is supposed to have applied himself
in his more advanced years.
There was also another Jacopo in very high repute,[17] called Jacobello
del Fiore, who has been falsely accused by Vasari, of having drawn his
figures all resting on the tip of their toes, in the manner of the
Greeks. His father, Francesco, was considered in the light of a
Coryphaeus of the art, and his tomb is still to be seen at Santi Giovanni
e Paolo, with a figure of him in his toga, and a commendatory epitaph in
Latin verse. No works of his, however, are to be seen in Venice,[18] a
dittico, or small altar, with his name having been conveyed to London,
bearing the date of 1412. It was obtained by the Chevalier Strange,
together with some other productions of the old Venetian artists. The
son of Francesco rose to a still higher degree of celebrity. He began to
make himself known as early as 1401, by producing an altarpiece at San
Cassiano di Pesaro, in which city I discovered another, with the date of
1409, and both bear the signature of _Jacometto de Flor_. A much nobler
work is a coronation of the Virgin, in the cathedral of Ceneda,
extremely rich in figures, insomuch as to have deserved the name of the
"Painting of Paradise," in a MS. of the lives of the bishops of that
place, which is preserved in the episcopal residence, and declares the
work to have been executed, _ab eximio illius temporis pictore Jacobello
de Flore_, 1432, at the expense of the bishop, Ant. Correr. There is a
Madonna, indisputably by his hand, in possession of Sig. Girolamo
Manfrini, painted in 1436, besides the _Giustizia_, drawn between two
archangels, in the _Magistrato del Proprio_, bearing the date of 1421. I
may venture to say that few artists of that time equalled him; both on
account of his having few rivals who had so early ventured to attempt
drawing figures as large as the life, and because of his power of
conferring upon them a certain grace and dignity, and, where called for,
a vigour and ease rarely to be met with in other paintings. The two
lions which he represented as symbols of his _Giustizia_ (Justice), are
truly grand, though the rest of the figures would have appeared to more
advantage had they been less loaded with ornaments, and in particular
the draperies glowing with gold lace, according to the custom of his
age. He had a rival in Giacomo Morazone, known by an altarpiece seen in
the island of St. Elena, of which I shall have to speak elsewhere.
Two pupils of Jacobello are recorded by Ridolfi, one of whom, Donato, is
superior to his master in point of style, and the other, Carlo Crivelli,
of whom the capital can boast only one or two pieces, and of whom little
mention is made in Venetian history. It would appear that he long
resided out of his native place, and in the Marca Trevigiana, from which
circumstance we find him repeatedly named in the _Storia Picena_, in the
_Guida di Ascoli_, and in the catalogue of Fabrianese paintings. At San
Francesco di Matelica, I saw an altarpiece and _grado_ by his hand, with
his name in the following inscription--_Carolus Crivellus Venetus miles
pinxit_, as well as another with his name at the Osservanti, in
Macerata, and a third which bears the year 1476, in possession of the
Cardinal Zelada. He is an artist more remarkable for his force of
colouring than for his correctness of design: and his principal merit
consists in those little history pieces, in which he has represented
beautiful landscapes, and given to his figures grace, motion, and
expression, with some traces of the colouring of the School of Perugia.
Hence his productions have occasionally been taken for those of Pietro,
as in the instance of that in Macerata; and if I mistake not, such an
opinion was entertained, even by the learned Father Civalli, (p. 60). In
Piceno, likewise, in Monsanmartino, or in Penna S. Giovanni, there
remain altarpieces by Vittorio Crivelli, a Venetian, most probably of
the same family, and produced in the years 1489 and 90, from which
period I lose sight of him, whether owing to his early decease, or his
having set out in pursuit of better fortune into foreign parts.
Hitherto we have examined only the productions of the capital and of the
annexed island. But in each of the other cities, now comprehended in the
state, there flourished painters during the same period, guided by
maxims differing both from those of Venice and of Murano. The School of
Bergamo had even then made distinguished progress under the direction of
the two Nova, who died at the commencement of the century; and mention
is made of a Commenduno, one of their pupils, besides some other
contemporaries, whose works, however, cannot, with any degree of
certainty, be pointed out. The same may be said of those in the adjacent
city of Brescia, which could then, also, boast of possessing some
excellent artists. Of these, there is nothing more than the name now
remaining, yet Brandolin Testorino and Ottaviano Brandino are names
placed in competition with that of Gentile di Fabriano, and, perhaps,
they are preferred to him. The former was supposed to have been engaged
along with Altichiero, in ornamenting the great hall in Padua, entitled
_Sala de' Giganti_.[19]
Subsequent to both of these appeared Vincenzio Foppa, of Brescia,
founder of an ancient school at Milan, of which I shall treat more at
length in the following book. Vasari makes mention of a Vincenzio da
Brescia, or Vincenzio Verchio, who is the same Vincenzo Civerchio di
Crema, commended by Ridolfo, and so much admired by the French in the
capture of Crema, that they fixed upon one of his pictures, then
ornamenting the public palace, to be presented to their king, and to
this artist we shall also again allude.
About the commencement of the fifteenth century there flourished, in
Verona, an artist of the name of Stefano,[20] declared, as it appears to
me, by Vasari, sometimes a native of Verona, sometimes of Zevio, a
territory adjacent to the former. The same author makes honourable
mention of him in several places, exalting him above the best disciples
of Angiolo Gaddi, to whose style, judging from what I have myself
observed at San Fermo and elsewhere, he added a certain dignity and
beauty of form, while such was his excellence in frescos, as to be
extolled by Donatello beyond any of the artists who were then known for
similar compositions in those parts.[21]
The Commendatore del Pozzo brings his labours down as far as the year
1463, an incredible assertion, as applied to a scholar of Gaddi. To this
period might better be referred Vincenzio di Stefano, apparently one of
his sons, of whom nothing survives but his name, and the tradition of
having conferred the first lessons of the art upon Liberale.
Highly distinguished, on the other hand, both by the consent of the
Veronese and of foreigners, is the name of Vittor Pisanello; although
there exists great confusion of dates in his history. Vasari makes him a
disciple of Castagno, who died about the year 1480; yet del Pozzo
informs us that he has in his house a holy figure, with the annexed
signature of Vittore, and dated 1406, most probably before the birth of
Castagno. Again we are told by Oretti that he was in possession of one
of his medals, representing the Sultan Mahomet, struck in the year 1481,
a supposition which, admitting the picture of Pozzo, we are unable to
reconcile to facts, so that the medal was, perhaps, taken from some
painting of Pisanello, coloured at a former time. To whatever master
Vittore may have been indebted, certain it is that several of his too
partial admirers have placed him above Masaccio, in regard to the
services rendered by him towards the progress of the art, though
impartial judges will not refuse to give him a station near him. The
whole of his labours, both in Venice and in Rome, have now perished. At
Verona, also, little remains; even that noble piece of San Eustachio, so
highly extolled by Vasari himself, having been destroyed; and his
_Nunziata_, at San Fermo, being greatly defaced by time, in which,
however, is still visible a country house, thrown into such admirable
perspective, as to delight the beholder. There remain several little
altarpieces, containing histories of San Bernardino, finished in the
style of the miniaturists, in the sacristy of San Francesco; but they
are crude in their colouring, and the figures more than usually long and
dry. The _Guide_ of the city announces them as the productions of
Pisanello; but there is no authority for this, and upon the strength of
a date of 1473, which is seen upon one of them, I do not scruple to
pronounce them by another hand. He is commended by Facio, (p. 47) for
his almost poetical style of expression; and there is a specimen of an
effort at caricature, with which Vittore embellished his historic
painting of Frederick Barbarossa, in the ducal palace at Venice. He is,
moreover, praised by the same author for his skill in drawing horses and
other animals, in which he surpassed every other artist. His name is not
unknown to the antiquaries; many medals struck by him, of different
princes, being found in museums, which acquired for him, in an equal
degree with his pictures, the esteem and applauses of Guarino, of
Vespasiano Strozza, of Biondo, and of several other distinguished
scholars.
In the adjacent city of Vicenza, resided a Jacopo Tintorello, strongly
resembling Vittore in his style of colouring, however inferior to him in
the perfection of his design, as far as we are enabled to judge from a
picture of the Saviour, with a crown of thorns, exhibited at Santa
Corona; a piece which reflects credit upon that school. It is yet more
highly honoured by an _Epiphany_, painted in San Bartolommeo, by
Marcello Figolino, an artist commemorated by Ridolfi, under the name of
Giovanni Batista, and who flourished, according to his account, at the
period of the two Montagna. He must, however, at that time, have been
far advanced in years, if it be true that the era of his birth preceded
that of Gian Bellini.[22] His manner is undoubtedly original; so much
so, that I find nothing resembling it, either in Venice or elsewhere; it
embraces great diversity of countenance, and of costume, skilful
gradation of light and shade, with landscape and perspective; and is
remarkable for ornament, and the finish and smoothness of every part. It
was fully entitled to render its author the father of a new epoch in the
history of art; if, indeed, we are to believe him, which does not
sufficiently appear, to be as ancient as has been affirmed.
Up to this period I have described the merits of the artists of the city
and of the state, who appeared in the early part of the century; but I
have not yet recorded its greatest master; I mean Squarcione, of Padua,
who from his ability in bringing up pupils, was pronounced by his
followers the first master of painters, and continued to educate them
until they amounted to 137. Ambitious of seeing more of the world, he
not only traversed the whole of Italy, but passing into Greece, he took
designs of the best specimens, both in painting and sculpture, of every
thing he met with, besides purchasing several. On returning to his
native place, he began to form a studio, which proved the richest of any
known at that period, not merely in designs, but in statues, torsos,
bassi relievi, and funereal urns. Thus devoting himself to the
instruction of students, with such copies, aided by his precepts, rather
than by his own example, he continued to live in comparative affluence,
and divided many of the commissions which he received among his
different pupils. In the church of the Misericordia is preserved a book
of anthems, illustrated with very beautiful miniatures, commonly
ascribed to Mantegna, the ornament of that school: but so great is the
variety of the different styles, that the most competent judges conclude
it to be one of the works committed to Squarcione, and by him
distributed among his disciples. Of these we are not yet prepared to
treat, the chief part of whom are known to have flourished subsequent to
the introduction of painting in oils, while little can be said of the
productions of Squarcione himself, though much in respect to his labours
as a master. And, indeed, he may be considered the stock, as it were,
whose branches we trace, through Mantegna, in the grand school of
Lombardy; through Marco Zoppo in the Bolognese; while it extended some
degree of influence over that of Venice itself. For Jacopo Bellini,
having come to exercise his talents in Padua, it would appear that he
took Squarcione for his model, as before stated.