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 Brixia.n.u.s, excellentissimo ingenio homines, ut qui c.u.m 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 ident.i.ty 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 pa.s.sages 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, a.s.serting 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 a.s.sertions, 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 canva.s.s, 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 att.i.tude 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 a.s.serts 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 ent.i.tled of any master to its grat.i.tude. 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 a.s.sistant, 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 doc.u.ments 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 t.i.tian, with Calvi, and the other h.o.a.ry-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 Ta.s.si 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 Ca.s.sino 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 a.s.sert, 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 cla.s.s, 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 a.s.serted 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 canva.s.s, 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 coa.r.s.eness, 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 circ.u.mstance 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 s.p.a.cious. 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 circ.u.mstance 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 pa.s.sed 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 circ.u.mstances are so strong, that in a matter of justice, they would have proved sufficient to establish his ident.i.ty; 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 att.i.tudes, 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 n.o.bility, 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 pa.s.sages, 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 Pa.s.seri 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 surpa.s.sing 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 n.o.ble 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 inst.i.tuted. 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 ill.u.s.trating 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 surpa.s.s 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 canva.s.s.

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.)

For a long period past, the art had become gradually more refined, and considered its subjects more minutely; in which Botticelli, Mantegna, and others had acquired great reputation. As minuteness, however, is opposed to sublimity, it ill accorded with that elevation in which the supreme merit of the art would seem to consist. In my opinion Lionardo succeeded in uniting these two opposite qualities, before any other artist. In subjects which he undertook fully to complete, he was not satisfied with only perfecting the heads, counterfeiting the shining of the eyes, the pores of the skin, the roots of the hair, and even the beating of the arteries; he likewise portrayed each separate garment and every accessary with minuteness. Thus, in his landscapes also, there was not a single herb or leaf of a tree, which he had not taken like a portrait, from the select face of nature; and to his very leaves he gave a peculiar air, and fold, and position, best adapted to represent them rustling in the wind. While he bestowed his attention in this manner upon the minutiae, he at the same time, as is observed by Mengs, led the way to a more enlarged and dignified style; entered into the most abstruse inquiries as to the source and nature of expression, the most philosophical and elevated branch of the art; and smoothed the way, if I may be permitted to say so, for the appearance of Raffaello. No one could be more curious in his researches, more intent upon observing, or more prompt in catching the motions of the pa.s.sions, as exhibited either in the features or the actions. He frequented places of public a.s.sembly, and all spectacles in which man gave free play to his active powers; and there, in a small book always ready at hand, he drew the att.i.tudes which he selected; and these designs he preserved in order to apply them, with expressions more or less powerful, according to the occasion, and the degree of expression he wished to introduce. For it was his custom, in the same manner as he gradually strengthened his shadows until he reached the highest degree; so also in the composition of his figures, to proceed in heightening them until he attained the perfection of pa.s.sion and of motion. The same kind of gradation he observed in regard to elegance, of which he was perhaps the earliest admirer; since previous artists appeared unable to distinguish grace from beauty, and still more so to adapt it to pleasing subjects in such a way as to rise from the less to the more attractive points, as was practised by Lionardo da Vinci. He even adhered to the same rule in his burlesques; always throwing an air of greater ridicule over one than another, insomuch that he was heard to say, that they ought to be carried to such a height, if possible, as even to make a dead man laugh.

The characteristic, therefore, of this incomparable artist, consists in a refinement of taste, of which no equal example, either preceding or following him, is to be found; if, indeed, we may not admit that of the old Protogenes, in whom Apelles was unable to find any reason why he himself should be preferred to him, except it were the superabundant industry of his compet.i.tor.[51] And, in truth, it would appear, that Vinci likewise, did not always call to mind the maxim of "ne quid nimis," in the observance of which, the perfection of human pursuits is to be found. Phidias himself, said Tully, bore in his mind a more beautiful Minerva and a grander Jove, than he was capable of exhibiting with his chisel; and it is prudent counsel, that teaches us to aspire to the best, but to rest satisfied with attaining what is good. Vinci was never pleased with his labours if he did not execute them as perfectly as he had conceived them; and being unable to reach the high point proposed with a mortal hand, he sometimes only designed his work, or conducted it only to a certain degree of completion.

Sometimes he devoted to it so long a period as almost to renew the example of the ancient who employed seven years over his picture. But as there was no limit to the discovery of fresh beauties in that work, so, in the opinion of Lomazzo, it happens with the perfections of Vinci's paintings, including even those which Vasari and others allude to as left imperfect.

Footnote 51: Plin. lib. x.x.xv. c. 10. Uno se praestare, quod manum ille de tabula nesciret tollere. This he said in reference to that Jalysus, on which Protogenes had bestowed no less than seven years.

Before proceeding further, it becomes our historical duty, having here mentioned his imperfect works, to inform the reader of the real sense in which the words are to be taken when applied to Vinci. It is certain he left a number of works only half finished, such as his Epiphany, in the ducal gallery at Florence, or his Holy Family, in the archbishop's palace at Milan. Most frequently, however, the report is grounded upon his having left some portion of his pieces less perfectly finished than the rest; a deficiency, nevertheless, that cannot always be detected even by the best judges. The portrait, for instance, of M. Lisa Gioconda, painted at Florence in the period of four years, and then, according to Vasari, left imperfect, was minutely examined by Mariette, in the collection of the king of France, and was declared to be carried to so high a degree of finish, that it was impossible to surpa.s.s it. The defect will be more easily recognized in other portraits, several of which are yet to be seen at Milan; for instance, that of a lady belonging to the Sig. Principe Albani; and one of a man, in the Palazzo Scotti Gallerati. Indeed Lomazzo has remarked, that, excepting three or four, he left all the rest of his heads imperfect. But imperfections and faults like his would have been accounted distinguishing qualities in almost any other artist.

Even his grand Supper has been stated in history as an imperfect production, though at the same time all history is agreed in celebrating it as one of the most beautiful paintings that ever proceeded from the hand of man. It was painted for the refectory of the Dominican fathers, at Milan, and may be p.r.o.nounced a compendium not only of all that Lionardo taught in his books, but also of what he embraced in his studies. He here gave expression to the exact point of time best adapted to animate his history, which is the moment when the redeemer addresses his disciples, saying, "One of you will betray me." Then each of his innocent followers is seen to start as if struck with a thunderbolt; those at a distance seem to interrogate their companions, as if they think they must have mistaken what he had said; others, according to their natural disposition, appear variously affected; one of them swoons away, one stands lost in astonishment, a third rises in indignation, while the very simplicity and candour depicted upon the countenance of a fourth, seem to place him beyond the reach of suspicion. But Judas instantly draws in his countenance, and while he appears as it were attempting to give it an air of innocence, the eye rests upon him in a moment as the undoubted traitor. Vinci himself used to observe, that for the s.p.a.ce of a whole year, he employed his time in meditating how he could best give expression to the features of so bad a heart; and that being accustomed to frequent a place where the worst characters were known to a.s.semble, he there met with a physiognomy to his purpose; to which he also added the features of many others. In his figures of the two Saints Jacopo, presenting fine forms, most appropriate to the characters, he availed himself of the same plan; and being unable with his utmost diligence to invest that of Christ with a superior air to the rest, he left the head in an unfinished state, as we learn from Vasari, though Armenini p.r.o.nounced it exquisitely complete. The rest of the picture, the tablecloth with its folds, the whole of the utensils, the table, the architecture, the distribution of the lights, the perspective of the ceiling, (which in the tapestry of San Pietro, at Rome, is changed almost into a hanging garden) all was conducted with the most exquisite care; all was worthy of the finest pencil in the world. Had Lionardo desired to follow the practice of his age in painting in distemper, the art at this time would have been in possession of this treasure. But being always fond of attempting new methods, he painted this masterpiece upon a peculiar ground, formed of distilled oils, which was the reason that it gradually detached itself from the wall, a misfortune which had also nearly befallen one of his Madonnas, at S. Onofrio, at Rome, though it was preserved under gla.s.s. About half a century subsequent to the production of his great Supper, when Armenini then saw it, it was already _half decayed_; and Scanelli, who examined it in 1642, declares that it "_was with difficulty he could discern the history as it had been_." In the present century a hope had been indulged of this magnificent painting being restored by aid of some varnish, or other secret, as may be seen by consulting Bottari. In regard to this, however, and the other vicissitudes of this great picture, we ought also to consider what is stated in a tone of ridicule and reproach by Bianconi, in his _New Guide_.[52] It will be sufficient for my purpose to add, that nothing remains in the modern picture from the hand of Vinci, if we except three heads of apostles, which may be said to be rather sketched than painted. Milan boasts few of his works, as those which are ascribed to him are for the most part the productions of his school, occasionally retouched by himself, as in the altar-piece of S. Ambrogio _ad nemus_, which has great merit. A Madonna, however, and Infant, in the Belgioioso d'Este palace, as well as one or two other pictures in private possession, are undoubtedly from his hand. We are a.s.sured, indeed, that he left few pieces at Milan, as well from his known fastidiousness in painting, as from his having been diverted from it, both by inclination and by the commissions received from the prince, to conduct works connected with engineering, hydraulics, and machinery for a variety of purposes, besides those of architecture;[53] and especially in regard to that celebrated model of a horse, of which, owing to its size, as we are told by Vasari, no cast could be taken in bronze. And this writer is the more ent.i.tled to credit, as well because he flourished near the period of which he treats, as because he could hardly be ignorant of a work, which would almost have placed the fame of our Italian on an equality with that of Lysippus.[54]

Footnote 52: (Page 329.) The Sig. Balda.s.sare Orsini has likewise inveighed against the inconsiderate retouchings of old paintings, in his _Risposta_, p. 77; where he also alludes to a letter of Hakert's, in defence of varnishes, and to another in reply, in which the use of them is disapproved by force of examples. He moreover cites a Supplementary Letter drawn from the Roman Journal of Fine Arts, for December, 1788.

Footnote 53: A number of designs are to be seen in his MS.

volumes belonging to the Ambrosian collection. See Mariette's letter, in vol. ii. of Lett. Pittoriche, p. 171; and, also, "Observations upon the Designs of Lionardo," by the Ab. Amoretti, Ed. of Milan, 1784.

Footnote 54: It was intended for the equestrian statue of Francesco Sforza, father of Lodovico. The Cav. Fr. Sabba da Castiglione has mentioned in his Ricordi, No. 109, that this very ingenious model, so greatly celebrated in the annals of the arts, which cost Vinci sixteen years to complete, was seen by the writer in 1499, converted into a target for the Gascon bowmen in the service of Louis XII. when he became master of Milan.

Of all his labours in Milan, therefore, nothing is better deserving of our notice than the academy which he founded, whose pupils const.i.tute the proudest and most flourishing epoch of this school. They are not all equally well known; and we often find, both in collections and in churches, that pictures are pointed out as being of the school of Vinci, without specifying the particular artists. Their altar-pieces seldom display composition, varying much from that common to other schools of the age; namely, figures of the Virgin with the Infant, upon a throne, surrounded by saints, chiefly in an erect posture, and a few cherubs on the steps.

Vinci's disciples, however, if I mistake not, were the first who conferred on their figures some degree of unity in action, so as to give them the appearance of conversing with each other. In the remaining parts, also, they exhibit a pretty uniform taste; they represent the same faces, all somewhat oval, smiling lips, the same manner in their precise and somewhat dry outlines, the same choice of temperate colours, well harmonized, together with the same study of the chiaroscuro, which the less skilful artists overcharge with darkness, while the better ones apply it in moderation.

One who approached nearest to his style, at a certain period, was Cesar da Sesto, likewise called Cesare Milanese, though not recorded by Vasari, or Lomazzo, in the list of his disciples. Still he is generally admitted by more modern writers. In the Ambrosian collection is the head of an old man, so extremely clear and studied, in the Vinci manner, by this artist, as to surprise the beholder. In some of his other works he followed Raffaello, whom he knew in Rome; and it is reported, that this prince of painting one day said to him, "It seems to me strange that being bound in such strict ties of friendship as we two are, we do not in the least respect each other with our pencils," as if they had been rivals on a sort of equality. He was intimate too with Balda.s.sar Peruzzi, and was employed with him in the castle of Ostia. In this work, which was one of the earliest efforts of Balda.s.sare, Vasari seems inclined to yield the palm of excellence to the Milanese artist. He was esteemed Vinci's best pupil; and he is more than once held up by Lomazzo, as a model in design, in att.i.tude, and more particularly in the art of using his lights. He cites an Herodias by him, of which I have seen a copy in possession of the Consiglier Pagave, and the countenance bore an extreme resemblance to the Fornarina of Raffaello. The Cav. D. Girolamo Melzi has likewise one of his Holy Families, in the Raffaello manner, which he obtained a few years ago at an immense sum, as well as that celebrated altar-piece painted for S. Rocco. It is divided into compartments; in the midst is seen the t.i.tular Saint and the Holy Virgin, with the Infant, imitated from a figure by Raffaello, which is at Foligno. From his Dispute of the Sacrament he likewise borrowed the S. Gio.

Batista seated on a cloud, which is accompanied with the figure of St. John the Evangelist, placed in the same position. These decorate the upper part of the picture; the lower being occupied by the figures of the two half-naked saints, Cristoforo and Sebastiano, both appropriately executed, and the last exhibiting a new and beautiful foreshortening. They are on a larger scale than the figures of Poussin, and with such resemblance to Coreggio's, that, in the opinion of the Ab. Bianconi, they might have been easily ascribed to him, in default of the artist's name; such is the softness, union, and brightness of the fleshes, such their beauty of colouring, and the harmony investing the whole painting. It used to be closed with two panels, where, with a certain correspondence of subjects, were drawn the two princes of the Apostles, with Saints Martino and Giorgio on horseback; all of which display the same maxims, though not equal diligence in the art. Hence we may infer that this artist did not, like Vinci, aspire at producing masterpieces as an invariable rule, but was content, like Luini, with occasional efforts of the kind.

At the church of Sarono, situated between Pavia and Milan, are seen the figures of four Saints, drawn on four narrow pilasters; the two equestrian saints, already mentioned, and Saints Sebastiano and Rocco, to whom especially invocations are made against the plague. They are inscribed with the name _Caesar Magnus_, f. 1533: the foreshortening is well adapted to the place; and the figure of S. Rocco more especially displays a composition such as we have mentioned. The features are not very pleasing, with the exception of those of St. George, as they are somewhat too round and full.

These pieces are in general a.s.signed to the artist of whom we here treat, and many are inclined to infer, from the inscription, that he belonged to the family of the Magni. But it is doubted by others; the frescos not appearing to justify his high reputation, however excellent in their way.

Besides, I find the death of Cesare da Sesto recorded, in a MS.

communicated to me by Sig. Bianconi, as occurring in the year 1524, though not in such a manner as to remove all kind of doubt. I find some reason for inclining to an opposite opinion in the great diversity of style, remarkable in this artist, the conformity of various ideas in the frescos and in his altar-piece, together with the silence of Lomazzo, generally so exact in his mention of the best Lombards, and who records no other Cesare but da Sesto.

I ought not to separate the name of this n.o.ble figurist from that of Bernazzano the landscape painter, as they were united no less in interest than in friendship. It is uncertain whether he was instructed by Vinci; he doubtless availed himself of his models, and in drawing rural landscape, fruits, flowers, and birds, he succeeded so admirably as to produce the same wonderful effects as are told of Zeuxes and Apelles, in Greece. This indeed Italian artists have frequently renewed, though with a less degree of applause. Having represented a strawberry-bed in a court-yard, the peafowl were so deceived by its resemblance, that they pecked at the wall until the painting was destroyed. He painted the landscape part for a picture of the Baptism of Christ, and on the ground drew some birds in the act of feeding. On its being placed in the open air, the birds were seen to fly towards the picture, as if to join their companions. As this artist had the sense to perceive his own deficiency in figures, he cultivated an intimacy with Cesare, who added to his landscapes fables and histories, sometimes with a degree of license that is reprobated by Lomazzo. These paintings are held in high esteem, where the figure-painter has made a point of displaying his powers.

Gio. Antonio Beltraffio, as his name is written on his monument, was a gentleman of Milan, who employed only his leisure hours in painting, and produced some works at Milan, and other places; but the best is at Bologna.

It is placed at the Misericordia, and bore his signature, with that of his master Vinci, and the date 1500, though these have been since erased. In it is represented the Virgin between Saints John the Baptist and Bastiano, while the figure of Girolamo da Cesio, who gave the commission for the picture, is seen kneeling at the foot of the throne. It forms the only production of Beltraffio placed in public, and is on that account esteemed the more valuable. The whole of it exhibits the exact study of his school in the air of the heads, judicious in composition, and softened in its outlines. His design, however, is rather more dry than that of his fellow pupils; the effect, perhaps, of his early education, under the Milanese artists of the fourteenth century, not sufficiently corrected.

Francesco Melzi was another Milanese of n.o.ble birth, enumerated among Lionardo's disciples, though he had only the benefit of his instructions in design during his more tender years. He approached nearest of any to Vinci's manner, conducting pieces that are frequently mistaken for those of his master; but he employed himself seldom, because he was rich.[55] He was greatly esteemed by Vinci, inasmuch as he united a very fine countenance to the most amiable disposition, his grat.i.tude inducing him to accompany his master on his last visit into France. He was as generously rewarded for it, becoming heir to the whole of Vinci's designs, instruments, books, and ma.n.u.scripts. He promoted as far as possible the reputation of his master, by furnishing both Vasari and Lomazzo with notices for his life; and by preserving for the eye of posterity the valuable collection of his writings. For as long as the numerous volumes deposited at the Ambrosian library continue to exist, the world must admit that he was one of the chief revivers, not only of painting but of statics, of hydrostatics, of optics, and of anatomy.