Footnote 55: Amoretti, Mem. Stor. del Vinci, p. 130.

Andrea Salai, or Salaino, was, from similar qualities, a great favourite with Vinci, who chose him according to the language of the times, as his _creato_, using him as a model for beautiful figures, both of a human and angelic cast. He instructed him, as we are told by Vasari, in matters pertaining to the art, and retouched his labours, which I think must gradually have changed their name; as a Salai is not now esteemed like a Vinci. There is a St. John the Baptist pointed out as his, elegant, but rather dry, in the archbishop's palace; a very animated portrait of a man, in the Aresi palace; with a few other pieces. His picture in the sacristy of S. Celso, is more particularly celebrated. It was drawn from the cartoon of Lionardo, executed at Florence, and so greatly applauded, that the citizens ran to behold it, as they would have done some great solemnity.

Vasari calls it the cartoon of St. Anna, who, with the Virgin, is seen fondling the Holy Child, while the infant John the Baptist is playing with him. Subsequently, this cartoon rose into such repute, that when Francis I.

invited Vinci to his court, he entreated that he would undertake the colouring; but the latter, says Vasari, according to his custom, amused him a long while with words. It appears, moreover, from a letter of P. Resta, inserted in the third volume of the Lettere Pittoriche, that Vinci formed three cartoons of his St. Anna, one of which was coloured by Salai. This artist admirably fulfilled the design of the inventor, in the taste of his well harmonised and low colours, in the agreeable character of his landscape, and in grand effect. In the same sacristy, opposite to it, was placed, for some time, a Holy Family by Raffaello, now removed to Vienna; nor did it shrink from such compet.i.tion. A similar copy of the same cartoon was obtained from Vienna for our reigning sovereign, Ferdinand III. and now adorns the ducal gallery at Florence, likewise, perhaps, from the hand of Salai.

Marco Uglone, or Uggione, or da Oggione, ought to be included among the best Milanese painters. He did not employ himself exclusively on favourite pictures, like most of the scholars of Vinci, who preferred to paint little and well; but was celebrated for his frescos; and his works at the Pace still maintain their outline entire, and their colours bright. Some of these are in the church, and a very magnificent picture of the Crucifixion is to be seen in the refectory; surprising for the variety, beauty, and spirit of its figures. Few Lombard artists attained the degree of expression that is here manifested; and few to such mastery of composition and novelty of costume. In his human figures, he aimed at elegance of proportion; and in those of horses he is seen to be the disciple of Vinci.

For another refectory, that of the Certosa, in Pavia, he copied the Supper of Lionardo, and it is such as to supply, in some measure, the loss of the original. Milan boasts two of his altar-pieces, one at S. Paolo in Compito, and another at S. Eufemia, in the style of the school we have described, and both excellent productions; though the manner which he observed in his frescos, is more soft and a.n.a.logous to modern composition.

In the historical memoirs of Vinci, written by Amoretti, one Galeazzo is mentioned as one of his pupils, though it is difficult to decide who he was, along with other artists recorded in the Vinci MSS. These are one Jacomo, one Fanfoia, and a Lorenzo, which might perhaps be interpreted to be Lotto, did not the epochs pointed out by Count Ta.s.si and P. Federici, relating to this artist, appear inapplicable to the Lorenzo of Vinci, who was born in 1488, and came to Lionardo in April, 1505, and probably while Vinci was at Fiesole, since he was there in the month of March in that year; that is, a month before,[56] and continued to reside with him at least while he remained in Italy. I am inclined to believe he filled the place of his domestic.

Footnote 56: See Amoretti, p. 90.

Father Resta, in his "Portable Gallery," cited by me in the third chapter, inserts also, among Vinci's Milanese disciples, one Gio. Pedrini, and Lomazzo, a Pietro Ricci, of whom I can learn nothing farther. Some, indeed, include in the same list Cesare Cesariano, an architect and painter in miniature, whose life has been written by Poleni. Lattuada, too, mentions Niccola Appiano, and makes him the author of a fresco painting over the gate of the Pace, which is certainly in the Vinci manner. Cesare Arbasia, of whom we shall further treat in the sixth book of the fifth volume, under the head of Piedmont, was erroneously referred, at Cordova, to the school of Vinci, and is mentioned as his pupil by Palomino. This was impossible, if we consider the epochs of his life, together with the character of his paintings. Were a resemblance of style enough to decide the question of preceptorship, I might here add to Leonardo's school a number of other Milanese, both of the city and the state. I cannot, however, dispense with a maxim, which, under a variety of forms, I have recommended to my readers; that history alone can ascertain for us the real pupils, as style does such as are imitators. Being unable, therefore, to p.r.o.nounce them disciples, I shall give to Vinci only as his imitators the names of Count Francesco d'Adda, who was accustomed to paint on panels and on slate for private cabinets; Ambrogio Egogui, of whom there remains at Nerviano a fine altar-piece, executed in 1527; Gaudenzio Vinci, of Nova, who is distinguished also for another altar-piece at Arona, with a date anterior to the preceding. I never saw any of these; but it is agreed by all, that they are in the Vinci manner; and that the last especially is an astonishing production. Another work, which made its appearance only a few years ago at Rome, representing the figure of the Virgin, and quite in Leonardo's composition, as I have heard, bears the following inscription: _Bernardinus Faxolus de Papia fecit_, 1518. It was purchased by the Sig.

Principe Braschi, for his very choice gallery; and it appeared truly surprising at Rome, that such a painter should be presented to our age, as it were alone, and without a word of recommendation from any historian. Yet similar occurrences are not unknown in Italy, and it forms a portion of her fame to enumerate her celebrated artists by ranks and not by numbers.

It remains for us to do justice to Vinci's most distinguished imitator, Bernardin Lovino, as he writes it, or Luini, as it is generally expressed; a native of Luino, in the Lago Maggiore. Resta a.s.serts, that he did not arrive at Milan until after the departure of Vinci, and that he was instructed by Scotto. The author of the Guide, (at page 120) includes him in the list of Lionardo's pupils, and this, from the period when he flourished, might, I think, have been the case. Because if Gaudenzio, born in 1484, _was at once the disciple of Scotto and of Lovino_, as we are informed in the treatise of Lomazzo, (p. 421) it follows, that Bernardino must already have been a master about 1500, the time when Vinci left Milan.

To much the same period Vasari refers Bernardino da Lupino, (he should have said da Luino,) an artist who painted the Marriage and other histories of the Virgin in so highly finished a taste at Sarono. One of Vasari's annotators erroneously again changes the name of Lupino into _Lanino_, a pupil of Gaudenzio. My supposition respecting the age of Bernardino, is further confirmed by a portrait which he drew of himself at Sarono, in his Dispute of the child Jesus with the Doctors, where he appears then old, and this picture was executed in the year 1525, as appears from the date.

Luini, therefore, may have been one of Vinci's disciples; and he certainly frequented his academy. Others indeed of the school surpa.s.sed him in delicacy of hand, and in the pleasing effect of the chiaroscuro, a quality for which Lomazzo commends Cesare da Sesto, declaring that Luini drew his shadows in too coa.r.s.e a style. Notwithstanding this, no artist approached nearer Vinci, both in point of design and colouring than Bernardino, who very frequently composed in a taste so like that of his master, that out of Milan many of his pieces pa.s.s for those of Vinci. Such is the opinion of true connoisseurs, as reported and approved by the author of the New Guide, who is a.s.suredly one belonging to this cla.s.s. He adduces two examples in the pictures at the Ambrosiana; namely, the Magdalen, and the St. John, who is seen caressing his lamb, a piece which foreigners can hardly be persuaded is not from Vinci's own hand. I have seen other pictures of equal, or nearly equal, merit, in different Milanese collections which I have frequently mentioned.

We must, however, add what I observed in reference to Cesare da Sesto just before, that in some of his works there is great resemblance to the manner of Raffaello, such as in a Madonna, belonging to the Prince of Keweniller, and one or two others which I know were purchased under the impression of their being Raffaello's. Hence, I imagine, must have arisen the opinion, that he had visited Rome, which is very properly questioned by the Ab.

Bianconi, (p. 391), who rather inclines to the negative. Nor can I myself admit it without some further proofs, a similarity of manner to me appearing far too weak an argument to decide the fact. The same point was discussed in the third chapter on the subject of Coreggio; and if we found reason to conclude, that Coreggio succeeded in enlarging and refining his divine genius to such a degree, without seeing either Raffaello or Michelangiolo at Rome, we may admit the same to have been the case in the instance of Luini. The book of nature is equally open to all artists; taste is a sure guide to selection; and, by degrees, practice leads to the complete execution of what is thus selected. Vinci's taste so nearly resembled that of Raffaello in point of delicacy, grace, and expression of the pa.s.sions, that had he not been diverted by other pursuits, and had he sacrificed some degree of his high finish, for the sake of adding to his facility, amenity, and fulness of outline, his style would naturally have run into compet.i.tion with that of Raffaello, with whom, as it is, in some of his heads especially, he has many points in common. It was the same with Bernardino, who had embued himself with the taste of Vinci, and nourished during a period that bordered on an improved degree of freedom and softness of manner. At first, indeed, he adopted a less full and somewhat dry style, such as we easily recognise in his Pieta, at the Pa.s.sione; subsequently he proceeded gradually to modernize it. Even that fine little picture of the Ebriety of Noah, which is shewn at S. Barnaba, as one of his most exquisite pieces, retains a certain precision in its design, a hardness of drapery and a direction of folds, which remind us of the fourteenth century. He becomes more modern in his histories of S. Croce, executed about 1520, several of which he repeated at Sarono five years after, where he appears to surpa.s.s his own productions. These last are the works which most resemble Raffaello's composition; though they retain that minuteness in decoration, the gilding of glories, and the abundance of little ornament in the temples, such as we see in Mantegna and his contemporaries; all of which were abandoned by Raffaello, when he arrived at his best manner.

It is my opinion, in fact, that this artist was not so much indebted to Rome, from whose masters he probably only imitated some prints or copies, as to Vinci's academy, with whose maxims he became completely familiar; and more especially to his own genius, vast in its kind, and equalled by very few. I say in its kind; for I allude to all that is sweet, beautiful, pious, and sensitive in the art. In those histories of our Lady, at Sarono, her features present us with a lovely union of beauty, dignity, and modesty, such as approach to Raffaello, although they are not his. They are, moreover, always consistent with the history the artist represents, whether we behold the Virgin at the marriage, or listening with wonder to the prophecies of Simeon; when, penetrated with the grand mystery, she receives the wise men of the east; or when, with a countenance of mingled joy and sorrow, she inquires of her divine son, teaching in the temple, why he had thus left her. The other figures possess a corresponding beauty; the heads appear to live, the looks and motions seem to be expecting a reply; combined with variety of design, of drapery, and of pa.s.sions, all borrowed from nature; a style in which every thing appears natural and unstudied, which gains at a first view, which compels the eye to study part by part, and from which it cannot withdraw itself without an effort: such is the character of Luini's style in that temple. We observe little variation in his other pictures, which he executed with more care, and at a more mature age, at Milan; nor can I imagine what could lead Vasari to a.s.sert _that the whole of his works are tolerable_; when we meet with so many calculated to excite our wonder. Let us consult his picture of Christ scourged, at S.

Giorgio, and inquire by what hand the countenance of our Redeemer has been drawn more full of kindness, humility, and piety; or turn to his smaller cabinet paintings in the possession of the Signori Litta, and other n.o.ble houses, so beautifully finished, and inquire again how many artists in his own times could have equalled him in these? The genius of Luini does not, moreover, appear to have been at all fastidious or slow; at least in his fresco paintings. Thus his Crown of Thorns, placed at the college of S.

Sepolcro, a picture abounding with figures, for which he received one hundred and fifteen lire, occupied him thirty-eight days, besides eleven more, during which one of his pupils was engaged on the work. He availed himself of similar aid, likewise, in painting the choir of Sarono, in the Monastero Maggiore, at Milan, in several churches of Lago Maggiore, and in other places; and to these a.s.sistants we ought apparently to ascribe whatever parts we find less perfect.

Two only of his disciples, his own sons, as far as I can learn, are known.

At the period when Lomazzo published his treatise, in 1584, they were both living, and both mentioned by him with commendation. Of Evangelista, the second brother, he remarks, that in the art of ornamenting and festooning, he was equally ingenious and fanciful, at the same time giving him a high rank in other branches of painting; though it is to be regretted that he did not point out any of his productions. Aurelio Luini is frequently praised in the same work, as well as in the Teatro, for his knowledge of anatomy, and for his skill in landscape and perspective. He is subsequently introduced in the Treatise upon Painting, among the most celebrated artists of Milan who then flourished, as a successful rival of Polidoro's style, of which a specimen is praised, consisting of a large fresco, on the facade of the Misericordia. After the lapse of two centuries, Bianconi has written of him with more freedom, declaring, that though the son, he was not the follower of Bernardino, the purity of whose style he was far from attaining. And, in truth, if we except his composition, there is not much calculated to please in this artist. We may, indeed, often trace the paternal manner, much deteriorated however, and tainted with mannerism; his ideas are common, his att.i.tudes less natural, the folds of his drapery are minute, and drawn in a mechanical manner. This character prevails in some genuine pieces of his that I have seen; among which is one in the Melzi Collection, with his name and the date of 1570. Others, however, which I have examined at Milan, are in a better taste, especially at S. Lorenzo, where an altar-piece with the Baptism of Christ, is ascribed to him, that would have done credit to Bernardino. Aurelio instructed in the art Pietro Gnocchi; and, if I mistake not, he was surpa.s.sed by his pupil, both in selection and in good taste. A Pietro Luini, having the reputation of a soft and accurate hand, and esteemed the last of the Luini, being admitted in history, I doubt whether he be not the Pietro of whom we here treat, occasionally surnamed from the house of his master, as we find in the case of Porta, and others of the sixteenth century. To him was ascribed the S.

Pietro, painted for S. Vittore, seen in the act of receiving the Keys; but in the _New Guide_ it is correctly given to the hand of Gnocchi.

Having thus shewn, as in a family tree, the regular successors of Leonardo at Milan, we must prepare to examine the other school, that traces its origin to Foppa, and other artists of the fourteenth century, who are mentioned in their place. It is not to be confounded with that of Vinci, and is separately considered by writers on the subject, though it is known to have derived great advantage from his models, and, I believe, from his discourse, inasmuch as he is allowed, like Raffaello, to have been extremely courteous and agreeable in his reception of every one, and in communicating his knowledge to all who desired it without any feeling of jealousy. If we take the pains to examine Bramantino and the rest of the Milanese artists, subsequent to the middle of the sixteenth century, we shall find them all more or less imitators of Vinci, aiming at his mode of chiaroscuro and his expression, rather dark in their complexions, and addicted to colour rather with force than with amenity. They are, however, less studious of ideal beauty, less n.o.ble in their conceptions, less exquisite in their taste, with the exception of Gaudenzio, who in every thing rivals the first artists of his age; and he is the only one of the ancient school who inculcated its maxims by teaching as well as by example.

Gaudenzio Ferrari da Valdugia is called by Vasari Gaudenzio Milanese. We mentioned him among Raffaello's a.s.sistants, referring to the account of Orlandi, who gives him as a pupil to Pietro Perugino, and noticing certain pictures that are attributed to him in lower Italy. But in those parts, where he only tarried a short time, or attempted some new method, he can scarcely be recognized, the information regarding it being very doubtful, which will be further shewn under the Ferrarese School. In Lombardy we may now treat of him with more certainty, many of his works being met with, and many particulars of him from the pen of Lomazzo, his successor in the art, as we shall shortly shew. He mentions Scotto as his master, and next to him Luini; and that previous to either of these he studied with Giovanone, is a current tradition at Vercelli. Novara is thought to be in possession of one of his first paintings, an altar-piece with various divisions at the cathedral, in the taste of the fourteenth century, and with the gilt decorations then so much in request. Vercelli possesses at S. Marco his copy of the cartoon of S. Anna, to which are added the figures of S. Joseph and some other saints. It is a youthful production, but which shews Gaudenzio to have been an early imitator of Vinci, from whom, says Vasari, he derived great a.s.sistance. He went young to Rome, where he is said to have been employed by Raffaello, and acquired a more enlarged manner of design, and greater beauty of colouring than had been practised by the Milanese artists. Lomazzo, against the opinion of Scannelli, ranks him among the seven greatest painters in the world, among whom he erred in not including Coreggio. For whoever will compare the cupola of S. Giovanni at Parma with that of S. Maria near Sarono, painted by Gaudenzio about the same period, must admit that there are a variety of beauties in the former, we may in vain seek for in the latter. Although we must admit that it abounds with fine, varied, and well expressed figures, yet Gaudenzio will be found in this, as in some other of his works, to retain traces of the old style; such as a degree of harshness; too uniform a disposition of his figures; his draperies, particularly of his angels, some of them drawn in lines like Mantegna's; with figures occasionally relieved in stucco, and then coloured, a practice he observed also in his trappings of horses, as well as in other accessaries in the manner of Montorfano.

With the exception of these defects, which he wholly avoided in his more finished pieces, Gaudenzio must be p.r.o.nounced a very great painter, and one who approached nearest of any among Raffaello's a.s.sistants to Perino and to Giulio Romano. He displays also a vast fund of ideas, though of an opposite cast, Giulio having frequently directed his genius to profane and licentious subjects, while the former confined himself to sacred compositions. He appears truly unequalled in his expression of the divine majesty, the mysteries of religion, and all the feelings of piety, of which he himself offered a laudable example, receiving the t.i.tle of _Eximie pius_ in one of the Novarese a.s.semblies. He was excellent in strong expression; not that he aimed at exhibiting highly wrought muscular powers, but his att.i.tudes were, as Vasari ent.i.tles them, wild, that is, equally bold and terrible where his subjects admitted of them. Such is the character of his Christ's Pa.s.sion, at the Grazie in Milan, where t.i.tian was his compet.i.tor; and his Fall of S. Paul, at the Conventual friars in Vercelli, a picture approaching the nearest of any to that of Michelangiolo in the Pauline chapel. In the rest of his pictures he shews great partiality for the most difficult foreshortenings, which he introduces very frequently. If he fails in reaching the peculiar grace and beauty of Raffaello, he at least greatly partakes of that character, as we observe in his S. Cristoforo, at Vercelli, where, in addition to the picture of the t.i.tular saint, he painted upon the walls various histories of Jesus Christ, and others of Mary Magdalen. In this great work he appears more perhaps than in any other, in the character of a beautiful painter, presenting us with the most lovely heads, and with angels as lively in their forms as spirited in their att.i.tudes. I have heard it praised as his masterpiece, though Lomazzo and the author of the Guide both agree in a.s.serting that the manner he adopted in the Sepolcro of Varallo surpa.s.sed all he had elsewhere produced.

If we examine into further particulars of his style, we shall find Ferrari's warm and lively colouring so superior to that of the Milanese artists of his day, that there is no difficulty in recognizing it in the churches where he painted; the eye of the spectator is directly attracted towards it; his carnations are natural, and varied according to the subjects; his draperies display much fancy and originality, as varied as the art varies its draperies; with middle tints, blended so skilfully as to equal the most beautiful produced by any other artist. And if we may so say, he represented the minds even better than the forms of his subjects.

He particularly studied this branch of the art, and we seldom observe more marked att.i.tudes or more expressive countenances. Where he adds landscape or architecture to his figures, the former chiefly consists of very fanciful views of cliffs and rocks, which are calculated to charm by their novelty; while his edifices are conducted on the principles of the best perspective. As Lomazzo, however, has dwelt so much at length on his admirable skill both in painting and modelling, it would be idle to insist upon it further. But I ought to add, that it is a great reflection upon Vasari that he did not better know, or better estimate such an artist; so that foreigners, who form their opinions only from history, are left unacquainted with his merit, and have uniformly neglected to do him justice in their writings.

Ferrari's disciples for a long period maintained the manner of their master, the first in succession with more fidelity than the second cla.s.s, and the second than the third. The chief part were more eager to imitate his expression and his facility than the elegance of his design and colouring, even so far as to fall into the bordering errors of negligence and of caricature. The less celebrated scholars of Gaudenzio were Antonio Lanetti da Bugnato, of whom I know of no remaining genuine production; Fermo Stella da Caravaggio, and Giulio Cesare Luini Valsesiano, who are still to be met with in some of the chapels at Varallo. Lomazzo, in the thirty-seventh chapter of his Treatise, besides Lanino, to come shortly under consideration, mentions, as imitators of Gaudenzio, Bernardo Ferrari of Vigevano, where two sides of the cathedral organ are painted by his hand; and Andrea Solari, or del Gobbo, or Milanese, as he is called by Vasari at the close of his life of Coreggio, in whose age he flourished. He says he was "a very excellent and beautiful painter, and attached to the labours of the art," adducing some of his pictures in private, and an a.s.sumption at the Certosa in Pavia, in which Torre (p. 138) gives him Salaino as a companion. His two most distinguished pupils were Gio. Batista della Cerva and Bernardino Lanino, from whom sprung two branches of the same school, the Milanese and that of Vercelli.

Cerva took up his abode at Milan, and if he painted every picture like that which adorns San Lorenzo, representing the Apparition of Jesus Christ to S.

Thomas and the other Apostles, he is ent.i.tled to rank with the first of his school, such is the choice and spirited character of the heads, such the warmth and distribution of his colouring, and so truly n.o.ble and harmonious is its effect as a whole. He must have been deeply versed in the art, though we possess no more of his public works, as he became the master of Gio. Paolo Lomazzo of Milan, who acquired from him the maxims he afterwards published in his Treatise upon Painting in 1584, and which he condensed in his Idea of the Temple of Painting, printed in 1590, to say nothing of his verses, for the most part connected with the same profession.

In his account of this writer Orlandi inserted several erroneous epochs of his life, subsequently cleared up by Bianconi, who fixes that of his loss of sight about 1571, in the thirty-third year of his age. Until this misfortune he had continued to cultivate all the knowledge he could derive from those times, which indeed in certain branches are in some measure undervalued. He took a tour through Italy, attaching himself to polite letters and to the sciences, for which he indulged such an enthusiasm, in his ill placed ambition to appear a philosopher, astrologer, and mathematician, that he treated matters even the most obvious in an abstruse and often false manner, as mistaken as the principles of the current astrology itself. This defect is very perceptible in his larger work, though being dispersed scantily here and there, it is the more easily excused. But it is more serious in his compendium, or Idea of the Temple of Painting, where it is presented to us in a point of view truly repugnant to common sense. Whilst engaged in teaching an art which consists in designing and colouring well, he flies from planet to planet; to each of the seven painters, whom he calls princ.i.p.als, he a.s.signs one of these celestial bodies, and afterwards one of the metals to correspond. Extravagant as this idea is, he gave scope to still more strange fancies; so that with this method, combined with a most fatiguing prolixity, and the want of an exact index, his treatises have been little read. It would be well worth while to re-model this work, and to separate the fruit from the husk, as it abounds not only with much pleasing historical information, but with the best theories of art heard from the lips of those who knew both Leonardo and Gaudenzio, as well as with excellent observations upon the practice of the best masters, and much critical knowledge relating to the mythology, history, and customs of the ancients. His rules of perspective are particularly valuable. They were compiled from the MSS. of Foppa, of Zenale, of Mantegna, and of Vinci, (Tratt. p. 264); in addition to which he has preserved some fragments of Bramantino, who was extremely ingenious in this art, (p. 276). By these qualities, united to a certain ease of style, not so agreeable perhaps as that of Vasari, yet not so mysterious and obscure as that of Zuccaro, nor so mean as that of Boschini, the treatise of Lomazzo is deserving of attention, even from confessed masters, and of their selection of some of the best chapters for the benefit of their oldest pupils. I know of no other better adapted to furnish youthful genius with fine pictoric ideas on every theme, none more likely to attach him, and to instruct him how to treat questions upon ancient art, none that displays a more extensive acquaintance with the human heart--what are its pa.s.sions, and by what signs they are manifested, and how they a.s.sume a different dress in different countries, with their appropriate limits; and no writer, finally, includes, in a single volume, more useful precepts for the formation of a reflecting artist, a fine reasoner, in a spirit congenial to Vinci, at once the father of the Milanese School, and I may add of pictoric philosophy, which consists in sound reflection upon each branch of the profession.

None of Lomazzo's paintings are doubtful, as the author has celebrated his own life and works in certain verses, composed, as I have reason to think, to beguile the tedium of hours wholly pa.s.sed in darkness, and which he ent.i.tled _Grotteschi_.[57] His first efforts, as in all instances, are feeble, of which kind is his copy of Vinci's Supper, which may be seen at the Pace. In his others we trace the hand of a master eager to put his maxims into execution, and who succeeds more or less happily. One of the most fundamental of these was to consider as dangerous the imitation of other artists, whether taken from paintings or engravings. It is contended that an artist should aim at becoming original, forming the whole of his composition in his own mind, and copying the individual portions from nature and from truth. This precept, first derived from Gaudenzio, was put in force both by Lomazzo and others of his own time. In his pictures we may always discover some original traits, as in that at S. Marco's, where, instead of putting the keys in the hands of S. Peter, according to the usual custom, he represents the Holy Child offering them to him in a playful att.i.tude. His novelty appears still more conspicuous in his large histories, such as his Sacrifice of Melchisedech, in the library of the Pa.s.sione, a picture abounding with figures, in which the knowledge of anatomy is equal to the novelty of the drapery, and the animation of the colours to that of the att.i.tudes. He has added to it a combat in the distance, well conceived, and in good perspective. I have seen no other painting of his that displays more knowledge. In other instances he is confused and overloaded, sometimes also extravagant, as in that grand fresco painted for the refectory of S. Agostino at Piacenza, or as it is called of the Rocchettini, which represents the subject of the Forty Days'

Fast. This is an ideal feast of meagre meats, where the sovereigns are seen in different seats (some of them portraits of the age), with lords of rank feasting at a splendid banquet of fish, while the poor are devouring such food as they have, and a greedy man is struggling with a huge mouthful sticking in his throat. The Lord blesses the table, and above is seen the sheet which was shewn in a vision to S. Peter. It is a grand picture, calculated to surprise the eye by the exactness with which the particular parts are copied from nature, and with a delicacy that Girupeno a.s.serts was unequalled even by Lomazzo in the works he executed at Milan. But it is not happy as a whole; the canva.s.s is too full, and there is a mixture of sacred and burlesque subjects, from scripture and from the tavern, that cannot be reconciled or approved.

Footnote 57: Can there be any doubt whether he was blind or not, when he wrote the following verses:--

Quindi andai a Piacenza, et ivi fei Nel refetorio di Sant'Agostino La facciata con tal historia pinta.

Da lontan evvi Piero in orazione Che vede giu dal ciel un gran lenzuolo Scender pien d'animai piccioli e grandi Onde la Quadragesma fu introdotta, &c.

Lomazzo gives the names of two Milanese as his pupils, Cristoforo Ciocca and Ambrogio Figino. He could not long have afforded them his instructions, as at the period when he wrote his treatise, being then blind, they were both still in early youth. He commends them for their portraits, and the first would appear never to have been an able composer, having left, perhaps, no other pieces in public, except his histories of S. Cristoforo, at S. Vittore al Corpo, by no means excellent. Figino succeeded no less admirably in portraits, which he painted also for princes, with high commendation from the Cav. Marino, than in large compositions almost always executed in oil, and more distinguished by the excellence than by the number of the figures. Some of his pictures, as his S. Ambrogio, at S.

Austorgio, or his S. Matteo, at S. Raffaello, though presenting few figures, fail not to please by the grandeur of character expressed in the faces of those saints; nor has any other artist of Milan approached in this art nearer to Gaudenzio who left such n.o.ble examples in his S. Girolamo and S. Paolo. In works of a larger scale, such as his a.s.sumption at S. Fedele, and the very elegant Concezione at S. Antonio, he also excels. His method is described by his preceptor, in his Treatise, (p. 438). He proposed for his imitation the lights and the accuracy of Leonardo, the dignity of Raffaello, Coreggio's colouring, and the outlines of Michelangiolo. Of the last in particular he was one of the most successful imitators in his designs, which are consequently in the highest repute; but independent of which he is little known, either in collections or in history, further than Milan. This artist must not be mistaken for Girolamo Figino, his contemporary, a very able painter, and an exact miniaturist, if we are to credit Morigia. There is also ranked, among Lomazzo's disciples, a Pietro Martire Stresi, who acquired some reputation by his copies from Raffaello.

The other branch of Gaudenzio's school, before mentioned, sprung from Bernardino Lanini of Vercelli, who there produced some excellent early imitations of the style of Gaudenzio, his master. At S. Giuliano there is a Pieta, with the date of 1547, which might be ascribed to Gaudenzio, had not the name of Bernardino been affixed. It is the same with his other pictures, executed at his native place, when still young, and perhaps the chief distinction consists in his inferior accuracy of design, and less force of chiaroscuro. At a riper age he painted with more freedom, and a good deal in the manner of the naturalists, ranking among the first in Milan. He had a very lively genius both for conceiving and executing, and adapted like that of Ferrari for n.o.ble histories. The one of S. Catherine, in the church of that name, near S. Celso, is greatly celebrated, and the more so, from what Lomazzo has said of it, being full of pictoric spirit in the features and the att.i.tudes, with colouring like t.i.tian's, and embued with grace, no less in the face of the saint, which partakes of Guido, than in the choir of angels, which rivals those of Gaudenzio. If there be any portion deficient, it is in the want of more care in arranging his drapery.

He was much employed, both for the city and the state, particularly at the cathedral of Novara, where he painted his Sibyllo, and his Padre Eterno, so greatly admired by Lomazzo; besides several histories of the Virgin, which though now deprived of their colour, still attract us by the spirit and clearness of the design. He was sometimes fond of displaying the manner of Vinci, as in his picture of the Patient Christ, between two angels, painted for the church of Ambrogio; so complete in every part, so beautiful and devotional, combined with so fine a relief, as to be esteemed one of the most excellent productions that adorn that church.

Bernardino had two brothers, not known beyond Vercelli; Gaudenzio, of whom there is said to be an altar-piece in the Sacristy of the Padri Barnabiti representing the Virgin between various saints; and his second brother Girolamo, from whose hand I have seen a Descent from the Cross, belonging to a private individual. Both display some distant resemblance to Bernardino in the natural expression of the countenances, the former also in the force of his colouring, though alike greatly inferior in design.

Three other Giovenoni, subsequent to Girolamo, flourished about the period of Lanini, whose names were Paolo, Batista, and Giuseppe; the last became an excellent portrait-painter. He was brother-in-law to Lanini, two of whose sons-in-law were likewise good artists; Soleri, whom I reserve for the school of Piedmont, and Gio. Martino Casa, a native of Vercelli, who resided, however, at Milan, whence I obtained my information. Perhaps the last in the list of this school was Vicolungo di Vercelli. In a private house at that place, I saw his Supper of Belshazzar, tolerably well coloured, abounding with figures, extravagant drapery, poor ideas, and no way calculated to surprise, except by exhibiting the successors of Raffaello reduced thus gradually to so mean a state.

Good landscape painters were not wanting in this happy epoch in Milan, particularly in the school of Bernazzano, their productions appearing in several collections, though their names are unknown. To this list perhaps belongs the Francesco Vicentino, a Milanese so much commended by Lomazzo, who, in a landscape, succeeded even in shewing the dust blown about by the wind. He was also a good figure-painter, of which a few fine specimens remain at the Grazie and other churches. Some ornamental painters and of grotesques we have already noticed, to which list we may add Aurelio Buso, mentioned with praise among the native Venetian artists, and here again justly recorded for his labours. Vincenzio Lavizzario, an excellent portrait-painter, may be esteemed the t.i.tian of the Milanese, to whose name we may unite that of Gio. da Monte of Crema, treated in the preceding book, and deserving of repet.i.tion here. Along with him flourished Giuseppe Arcimboldi, selected for his skill in portrait, as the court-painter of Maximilian II., in which office he continued also under the emperor Rodolph. Both these artists were much celebrated for those capricci, or fancy pieces, which afterwards fell into disuse. At a distance they appeared to be figures of men and women; but on a nearer view the Flora disappeared in a heap of flowers and leaves, and the Vertumnus was metamorphosed into a composition of fruits and foliage. Nor did these fanciful artists confine themselves to subjects taken from ancient fable; they added others in which they poetically introduced various personifications. The former even represented Cucina, with her head and limbs composed only of pots and pans and other kitchen utensils; while the latter, who acquired great credit from these strange inventions, produced a picture of Agriculture, consisting of spades, ploughs, and scythes, with other appropriate implements.

We have lastly to record an art connected with the inferior branches of painting, scarcely noticed by me in any other place, being, indeed, purposely reserved for the Milanese School, where it more particularly flourished. This is the art of embroidering, not merely flowers and foliage, but extensive history and figure-pieces. It had continued from the time of the Romans in Italy, and there is a very valuable specimen remaining in the so called Casula Dittica, at the Museo di Cla.s.se at Ravenna, or more properly some strips of it brocaded with gold, on which, in needlework, appear the portraits of Zenone, Montano, and other saintly bishops. It is a monument of the sixth century, and has been described by the Ab. Sarti, and afterwards by Monsig. Dionisi. The same custom of embroidering sacred walls with figures would appear, from the ancient pictures, to have continued during the dark ages, and there are yet some relics to be seen in some of our Sacristies. The most entire are at S.

Niccolo Collegiata in Fabriano, consisting of a priest's cope, with figures of apostles and different saints; and a vestment with mysteries of the pa.s.sion, worked in embroidery, with the dry and coa.r.s.e design of the fourteenth century. In Vasari we find frequent mention of this art; and, to say nothing of the ancients, he presents us with many names greatly distinguished in it in more cultivated ages: such as Paolo da Verona, and one Niccolo Veneziano, who being in the service of the Prince Doria, at Genoa, introduced Perin del Vaga at that court, as well as Antonio Ubertini, a Florentine, to whom we alluded under his own school.

Lomazzo traces the account of the Milanese from the earliest period. Luca Schiavone, he observes, carried this branch to the highest degree, and communicated it to Girolamo Delfinone, who flourished in the times of the last Duke Sforza, whose portrait he executed in embroidery, besides several large works, among which is the life of our lady, worked for the cardinal Baiosa. This skill became hereditary in the family, and Scipione, the son of Girolamo, was equally distinguished. His chases of different animals were in great request for royal cabinets, a number of them being collected by Philip of Spain and the English King Henry. Marcantonio, son of Scipione, followed the genius of the family, and is mentioned by Lomazzo in 1591 as a youth of great promise. This writer has also praised for her skill in the same line, Caterina Cantona, a n.o.ble Milanese lady, and has omitted the name of Pellegrini, the Minerva of her time, only perhaps because she had then hardly become celebrated. Other individuals of this house are mentioned in the list of artists. Andrea, who painted in the choir of S. Girolamo, and a Pellegrino his cousin, celebrated in the history of Palomino for his productions in the Escurial, and being both architect and painter to the royal court. The lady of whom I write, how far related to them I know not, devoted herself wholly to her needle, and by her hand were embroidered the great pallium (vestment) and other sacred furniture, still preserved in the sacristy of the cathedral, and exhibited to strangers with other curious specimens of ancient learning and the arts.

In the Guide for 1783, she is called Antonia, and in that for 1787 Lodovica, unless, indeed, they were two different persons. In the following age Boschini mentioned, with high commendation, the unrivalled Dorothea Aromatari, who, he adds, produced with her needle all those beauties which the finest and most diligent artists exhibited with their pencil. To hers he unites with praise the names of some other female embroiderers of the age; and we, in mentioning that of Arcangela Paladini, had occasion to commend her paintings and her needlework at the same time.

SCHOOL OF MILAN.

EPOCH III.

_The Procaccini and other foreign and native artists establish a new Academy, with new styles, in the city and state of Milan._

The two series which we have hitherto described have gradually brought us towards the seventeenth century, when there scarcely remained a trace either of the Vinci or Gaudenzio manner. This arose from their latest successors, who adopted, more or less, those new manners which were gradually introduced into Milan at the expense of the ancient style. As early as the time of Gaudenzio appeared in that city the Coronation of Thorns, painted by t.i.tian, which was so greatly admired that several of his pupils came to establish themselves there, besides other foreigners. Some unfortunate circ.u.mstances also occurred; particularly the plague, which more than once, in the same century, desolated the state, and which, sweeping off native artists, opened the way to strangers who succeeded to their commissions. Hence Lomazzo, at the close of his Tempio, only commends three among the Milanese figure-painters, who then flourished, Luini, Gnocchi, and Duchino, the rest being all foreigners. The attachment shewn by several n.o.ble families to the arts, conduced to invite them thither, and in particular that of the Borromea, which presented to the archiepiscopal seat of their country two distinguished prelates, cardinal Carlo, who added to the number of saints at the altar, and Federigo, who nearly attained the same honours. Both were inspired by the same spirit of religion; they were simple in private, but splendid and liberal in public. Out of their economy they clothed and fed numbers of citizens, and promoted the dignity of the sanctuary, and of their country. They erected and restored many n.o.ble edifices, and decorated with paintings a far greater number both in and beyond the city, insomuch as to make it observed that Milan was no less indebted to the Borromei than Florence to her Medici, or Mantua to her Gonzaghi. The Car. Federigo, who received his education first at Bologna, then at Rome, not only possessed a decided inclination but a taste for the fine arts; and he also enjoyed a longer and more tranquil pontificate than Carlo, so as to enable him to afford them superior patronage. Not satisfied with employing the ablest architects, sculptors, and painters in public works, he rekindled, as it were, the spark that yet survived of Vinci's academy, inst.i.tuting, with much care and expense, a new academy of the fine arts. He provided it with schools, with casts, and a very choice picture gallery,[58] for the benefit of the young students, taking advantage of the plan and rules of the Roman academy, founded a few years before, with his co-operation. The grand colossal figure of S. Carlo reflects equal honour on the new school and on its founder, being executed in bronze from the design of Cerani, and exhibited at Arona, the place where the saint was born; a statue fourteen times the height of the human figure, and vieing with the grandest productions of Greek or Egyptian statuary. In painting, however, to say the truth, the new is not equal to the ancient school, though by no means deficient in fine artists, as we shall shew. Meanwhile we must resume the thread of our history, and explain how the Milanese, being reduced to very few artists, while painters were much in request for the ornament of churches and other public edifices, greatly on the increase, were superseded by foreign artists, such as the Campi, the Semini, the Procaccini, and the Nuvoloni, who introduced new styles, while others were sought out in foreign parts by some of the citizens of Milan, particularly by Cerano and by Morazzone. These became the instructors of almost all the Milanese youth, and of the state; these commencing their labours about 1570, which they continued until after 1600, at length rose so superior to the ancient schools, not so much in soundness of taste and maxims, as in the amenity of their colours, as gradually to extinguish them. Nor did they only aim at teaching new styles; some of them began to treat them with so much haste as to fall into mannerism, from which period their school began to decline, and appeared to have adopted as a maxim to praise the theory of the ancients, and to practise the haste of the moderns. But let us return to our subject.

Footnote 58: He was one of the first in Italy who collected paintings of the Flemish School, which was then fast rising into reputation. His agreement with Gio. Breughel still exists, who painted for the academic collection at Milan the Four Elements, pictures very often repeated, of which copies are to be seen in the royal gallery at Florence, in the Melzi collection at Milan, and in several at Rome. The artist, who had great skill in drawing flowers, fruits, herbs, birds, and animals, of which he formed copious and beautiful compositions, displayed a grand variety in these, and was no less admirable in his high finish, in the clearness of his colours, and in other qualities which acquired him the esteem of the greatest artists, among whom Rubens was one who availed himself of his talents for landscape, which he introduced into his own pictures.

I mentioned, not far back, in treating of t.i.tian's disciples, the names of Callisto da Lodi and Gio. da Monte, and I have here to add that of Simone Peterzano, or Preterazzano, who, on his Pieta, at S. Fedele, inscribed himself _t.i.tiani Discipulus_; and his close imitation seems to confirm its truth. He produced also works in fresco, and particularly at S. Barnaba several histories of St. Paul. He there appears to have aimed at uniting the expression, the foreshortening, and the perspective of the Milanese to the colouring of the Venetian artists; n.o.ble works, if they were thoroughly correct; and if the author had been as excellent in fresco as in oil painting. From Venice, or rather from its Senate, we trace the name of Cesare Dandolo, who went to settle at Milan, and whose paintings adorn various palaces, esteemed no less for their art than on account of the rank of the n.o.ble artist.

The Campi were among the most eager to establish themselves at Milan, where they were much employed, and Bernardino more than the rest. He painted, likewise, in the adjacent cities, and it was at that period that he completed for the Certosa, at Pavia, the before-mentioned altar-piece of Andrea Solari, which, remaining unfinished at his death, was, after the lapse of many years, completed in the same style by Bernardino, so as to appear wholly from the same hand. Unable alone to despatch his commissions, he had his cartoons coloured by his pupils, who became, like their master, accurate, precise, and worthy of the commendations bestowed upon them by Lomazzo. One of these was Giuseppe Meda, both painter and architect, who represented upon an organ, in the Metropolitana, the figure of David seen playing before the ark. This work is cited by Orlandi, under the name of Carlo Meda, who, perhaps, belonged to the family of the preceding, and who, as stated in the dictionary, appears younger. Few of his other pictures are to be seen, as is observed by Scannelli. Another was Daniello Cunio, of Milan, who became a landscape painter of great merit; perhaps a brother, or other relation of the same Ridolfo Cunio, who is met with in several Milanese collections, and is particularly celebrated for his design. The third was Carlo Urbini da Crema, one of the least celebrated but most deserving artists of his age, and one whom we have commemorated elsewhere.

Lamo observes, that Bernardino had a vast number of scholars and a.s.sistants, and from his account, we are here enabled to add the names of Andrea da Viadana, Giuliano or Giulio de' Capitani, of Lodi, and Andrea Marliano, of Pavia. Perhaps, also, Andrea Pellini belongs to this list, who, though unknown in his native city of Cremona, is celebrated at Milan for his Descent from the Cross, placed at S. Eustorgio, in 1595.

Of a later date, appeared at Milan the two Semini, from Genoa; both of whom were much employed, and both disciples of the Roman more than any other style. Ottavio, the eldest, instructed Paol Camillo Landriani, called Il Duchino, who was justly praised in the Tempio of Lomazzo as a youth of the greatest promise. He subsequently produced a number of altar-pieces, among which was a Nativity, at S. Ambrogio, in which, to the design and elegance of his master, he unites perhaps a greater degree of softness. The professors. .h.i.therto described, do not reach the era of the art's decline, except, possibly, in their extreme old age; insomuch as to be fully worthy of the praise I bestow.

The artists, however, who more particularly employed themselves in painting and teaching at Milan during this period, were the Procaccini of Bologna.

Though not mentioned by Lomazzo in his Treatise, in the year 1584, they are afterwards, in 1590, recorded with much honour in his Tempio; so that we may infer that they became celebrated during the intervening period at Milan, where they afterwards established themselves in 1609. Ercole is at the head of this family, whom Orlandi, following Malvasia, represents in a military manner, as having lost the field at Bologna, where he could no longer "make head against the Samacchini, the Cesi, the Sabbatini, the Pa.s.sarotti, the Fontana, the Caracci, though he afterwards encountered the Figini, the Luini, the Cerani, and the Morazzoni, at Milan." I am at a loss how to verify such an a.s.sertion. Ercole was born in 1520, as I gathered from a MS. of P. Resta, in the Ambrosian library; and in 1590, when the "Temple of Painting" first issued from the press, he was very old, nor did he ever exhibit any of his pictures in public at Milan, so that Lomazzo ought to have sought subjects for commendation of him from Parma, and more particularly Bologna. Many of his works still remain there, from which we may decide whether Malvasia and Baldinucci had more reason to represent him as an artist of mediocrity, or Lomazzo to ent.i.tle him a very successful imitator of the great Coreggio's colouring, as well as of his grace and beauty. In my own opinion he appears somewhat minute in design, and feeble in his colouring, resembling the tone of the Florentines; a thing so common among his contemporaries, that I know not why it should be made a peculiar reproach to him. For the rest he is more pleasing, accurate, and exact, than most artists of his age; and possibly his over diligence acted as an obstacle to him in a city where the rapid Fontana bore the chief sway. But this quality, besides exempting him from the mannerism then beginning to prevail, rendered him an excellent preceptor; whose princ.i.p.al duty is found to consist in checking the impatience of young artists, and accustoming them to precision and delicacy of taste. Thus many excellent pupils sprung from his school, such as Samacchini, Sabbatini, and Bertoia. He instructed also his three sons, Camillo, Giulio Cesare, and Carlo Antonio, from which last sprung Ercole the younger; all masters of young Milanese artists, and of whom it will be our business to treat in succession.

Camillo is the only one of the three who was known to Lomazzo, who describes him as an artist distinguished both for his design and his colouring. He received his first instructions from his father, and often displays a resemblance in his heads, and in the distribution of his tints; though, where he painted with care, he both warmed and broke them, as well as employed the middle colours, in a superior manner. He studied other schools, and if we are to believe some of his biographers, he practised at Rome from the models of Raffaello and Michelangiolo, besides being pa.s.sionately devoted to the heads of Parmigianino, an imitation of which is perceptible in all his works. He possessed wonderful facility both in conception and execution; added to nature, beauty, and spirit, always attractive to the eye, though they do not always satisfy the judgment. Nor is this surprising, as he early threw off the reign of paternal instruction, and executed works enough to have employed ten artists, at Bologna, at Ravenna, Reggio, Piacenza, Pavia, and Genoa. He was by many called the Vasari, and the Zuccaro of Lombardy; although to say truth, he surpa.s.ses them in sweetness of style and of colours. He was particularly engaged at Milan, a city which boasts some of his best productions, by which he obtained reputation there; and many of his worst, with which he satisfied those who valued his name. Of his earliest works there, and the most free from mannerism, are those adorning the exterior of the organ at the Metropolitana, along with various mysteries of our Lady, and two histories of David playing upon his harp; all described very minutely by Malvasia. But he produced nothing in Milan equal to his Judgment at S.

Procol di Reggio, esteemed one of the finest specimens of fresco in all Lombardy; and to his S. Rocco among the sick and dying of the plague, a picture that intimidated Annibal Caracci, when he had to paint a companion for it, (see Malvasia, p. 466). The pictures produced by Camillo, in the cathedral of Piacenza, where the Duke of Parma had placed him in compet.i.tion with Lodovico Caracci, whose genius was then mature, are well and carefully executed. He there represented our Lady crowned Queen of the Universe by the Almighty, surrounded with a very full choir of Angels, in whose forms he displayed the most finished beauty. It was the part of Lodovico to represent other angels around; and opposite to the Coronation the _Padri del Limbo_. The first occupied the most distinguished place in the tribune; though both then and now he was esteemed by spectators the least worthy of the two. However advantageously he there appears, and ent.i.tled to the applause of Girupeno and other historians, as well as travellers, he at the same time loses a portion of his consequence at the side of Caracci, who, by the novelty of his ideas, the natural expression of his countenances, of his att.i.tudes, and of his symbols, especially in those angels opposed to the more common conceptions of his rival, makes the monotony and weakness of Procaccini the more remarkable. Caracci's superior dignity, likewise, in his figures of the patriarchs, throws that of Camillo's Divinity into the shade. They also executed some histories of the Madonna, placed opposite each other; and almost bearing the same proportion as we have already mentioned. But as the Caracci were few, Procaccini for the most part triumphed over his compet.i.tors. He is even now well received in the collections of the great, and our own prince has recently obtained one of his a.s.sumptions, with Apostles surrounding the tomb of Jesus, a picture full of variety, and in a grand manner.

Giulio Cesare, the best of the Procaccini, at first devoted himself to sculpture with success, subsequently attaching himself to painting, as to a less laborious and more pleasing art. He frequented the Caracci Academy at Bologna; and it is said, that taking offence at some satirical observations of Annibal's, he struck, and even wounded him. His French biographer states Giulio's birth to have occurred in 1548, though he postpones this quarrel until 1609, in which year the Procaccini established themselves at Milan.