Gaudenzio Ferrari is mentioned by t.i.ti, as an a.s.sistant of Raffaello in the story of Psyche, and we shall advert to him again in another book as chief of the Milanese School. Orlandi, on the credit of some more modern writers, a.s.serts, that he worked with Raffaello also at Torre Borgia; and before that time, he considers him to have been a scholar of Scotto and Perugino. In Florence, and in other places in Lower Italy, some highly finished pictures are attributed to him, which partake of the preceding century, though they do not seem allied to the school of Perugino. Of these pictures we shall resume our notice hereafter; at present it may be sufficient to remark, that in Lombardy, where he resided, there is not a picture in that style to be found with his name attached to it. He is always Raffaellesque, and follows the chiefs of the Roman School.
Vasari also notices Jacomone da Faenza. This artist a.s.siduously studied the works of Raffaello, and from long practice in copying them, became himself an inventor. He flourished in Romagna, and it was from him that a Raffaellesque taste was diffused throughout that part of Italy. He is also mentioned by Baldinucci, and we shall endeavour to make him better known in his proper place.
Besides the above mentioned scholars and a.s.sistants of Raffaello, several others are enumerated by writers, of whom we may give a short notice. Il Pistoja, a scholar of Il Fattore, and probably employed by him in the works of Sanzio, as Raffaellino del Colle was with Giulio, is mentioned as a scholar of Raffaello by Baglione, and, on the credit of that writer, also by Taja. We mentioned him among the Tuscans, and shall further notice him in Naples, where we shall also find Andrea da Salerno, head of that school, whom Dominici proves to be a scholar of Raffaello.
In the _Memorie di Monte Rubbiano_, edited by Colucci, at page 10, Vincenzo Pagani, a native of that country, is mentioned as a pupil of the same master. There remains of him in the collegiate church there, a most beautiful picture of the a.s.sumption; and the Padre Civalli points out another in Fallerone and two at Sarnano, in the church of his religious fraternity, much extolled, and in a Raffaellesque manner, if we are to credit report. This painter, of whom, in Piceno, I find traces to the year 1529, again appears in Umbria in 1553, where Lattanzio his son, being elected a magistrate of Perugia, he transferred himself thither, and was employed to paint the altarpiece of the Cappella degli Oddi, in the church of the Conventuals, as we have already mentioned.
According to the conditions of the contract, Paparelli had a share with him in this work, and he must be considered as an a.s.sistant of Vincenzo, both because he is named as holding the second place, and because he is reported by Vasari on other occasions, as having been an a.s.sistant. But as history mentions nothing relative to this picture, except the contract, we shall content ourselves with observing, that this praiseworthy artist, who was pa.s.sed over in silence for so many years, still painted in the year 1553. Whether he was a scholar of Raffaello, or whether this was a tradition which arose in his own country in progress of time, supported only on the consideration of his age and his style, is a point to be decided by proofs of more authority than those we possess. I agree with the Sig. Arciprete Lazzari, when, writing of F.
Bernardo Catelani of Urbino, who painted in Cagli the picture of the great altar in the church of the Capucins, he says, that he had there exhibited the style of the school of Raffaello, but he does not consider him his scholar.
It has been a.s.serted, that Marcantonio Raimondi painted some pictures from the sketches of Raffaello, in a style which excited the admiration of the designer himself; but this appears doubtful, and is so considered by Malvasia. L"Armenini also a.s.signs to this school, Scipione Sacco, a painter of Cesena, and Orlandi, Don Pietro da Bagnaja, whom we shall mention in the Romagna School. Some have added to it Bernardino Lovino, and others Balda.s.sare Peruzzi, a supposition which we shall shew to be erroneous. Padre della Valle has more recently revived an opinion, that Correggio may be ranked in the same school, and that he was probably employed in the gallery, and might have painted the subject of the Magi, attributed by Vasari to Perino. This is conjectured from the peculiar smile of the mother and the infant. But these surmises and conjectures we may consider as the chaff of that author, who has nevertheless presented us with much substantial information. We shall now advert to the foreigners of this school. Bellori has enumerated, among the imitators of Raffaello, Michele c.o.c.kier, or Cocxie, of Malines, of whom there remain some pictures in fresco in the church dell"Anima. Being afterwards in Flanders, where several works of Raffaello were engraved by c.o.c.k, he was accused of plagiarism, but still maintained a considerable reputation; as to a fertile invention he added a graceful style of execution. Many of his best pictures pa.s.sed into Spain, and were there purchased at great prices. Palomino acquaints us with another excellent scholar of Sanzio, Pier Campanna, of Flanders, who, although he could not entirely divest himself of the hardness of his native school, was still highly esteemed in his day. He resided twenty years in Italy, and was employed in Venice by the Patriarch Grimani, for whom he painted several portraits, and the celebrated picture of the Magdalen led by Saint Martha to the Temple, to hear the preaching of Christ. This picture, which was bequeathed by the Patriarch to a friend, after a lapse of many years, pa.s.sed into the hands of Mr. Slade, an English gentleman. Pier Campanna distinguished himself in Bologna, by painting a triumphal arch on the arrival of Charles V., by whom he was invited to Seville, where he resided a considerable time, painting and instructing pupils, among whom is reckoned Morales, who, from his countrymen, had the appellation of the divine. He was accustomed to paint small pictures, which were eagerly sought after by the English, and transferred to their country, where they are highly prized. Of his altarpieces, several remain in Seville, and we may mention the Purification, in the Cathedral, and the Deposition at S. Croce, as the most esteemed. Murillo, who was himself a truly n.o.ble artist, greatly admired and studied this latter picture, which, even after we have seen the masterpieces of the Italian School, still excites our astonishment and admiration. This artist, to some one, who, in his latter years, inquired why he so often repaired to this picture, replied, that he waited the moment when the body of Christ should reach the ground.
Mention is also made of one Mosca, whether a native or foreigner I know not, as a doubtful disciple of this school. Christ on his way to Mount Calvary, now in the Academy in Mantua, is certainly a Raffaellesque picture, but we may rather consider Mosca an imitator and copyist, than a pupil of Raffaello. In the edition of Palomino, published in London, 1742, I find some others noticed as scholars of Raffaello, who being born a little before or after 1520, could not possibly belong to him; as Gaspare Bacerra, the a.s.sistant of Vasari; Alfonso Sanchez, of Portugal; Giovanni di Valencia; Fernando Jannes. It is not unusual to find similar instances in the history of painting, and the reports have for the most part originated in the last age. Whenever the artists of a country began to collect notices of the masters who had preceded them, their style had become the prevailing taste; and as if human genius could attain no improvement beyond that which it receives subserviently from another, every imitator was supposed to be a scholar of the artist imitated, and every school, arrogating to itself the names of the first masters, endeavoured to load itself with fresh honours.
[Footnote 26: Hist. Rom. vol. i. ad calcem.]
[Footnote 27: Besides his life by Vasari, another was published by Sig.
Abate Comolli, which I consider posterior to that of Vasari. Memoirs of him were also collected by Piacenza, Bottari, and other authors whom I shall notice; and I shall also avail myself of the information derived from the inspection of his pictures, and their character, and the various dates of his works.]
[Footnote 28: We find his name written _Io. Sanctis_ in the Nunziata of Sinigaglia; and it appears that he was born of a father called, according to the expression of that age, _Santi_ or _Sante_; a name in common use in many parts of Italy. In support of the surname of Sanzio, Bottari produces a portrait of Antonio Sanzio, which exists in the Palazzo Albani, representing him holding in his hands a doc.u.ment, with the t.i.tle of _Genealogia Raphaelis Sanctii Urbinatis_. Julius Sanctius is there named as the head of the family, _familiae quae adhuc Urbini ill.u.s.tris extat, ab agris dividendis cognomen imposuit_, and was the progenitor of Antonio. From the latter, and through a Sebastiano, and afterwards through a Gio. Batista, descends Giovanni, _ex quo ortus est Raphael qui pinxit a. 1519_. It is also recorded that Sebastiano had a brother, Galeazzo, _egregium pictorem_, and the father of three painters, Antonio, Vincenzio, and Giulio, called _maximus pictor_. Thus in this branch of the Sanzii are enumerated four painters, of whom I do not find any memorial in Urbino. The family also boasts of a Canon in divinity, and a distinguished captain of infantry. The anonymous writer of Comolli confirms this ill.u.s.trious origin of Raffaello; but it is highly probable, that in that age, when the forgery of genealogies, as Tiraboschi observes, was a common practice, he may have adopted it without any examination. The portrait of Antonio is well executed, but it has been said that it would have been much more so, if Raffaello had painted it a year before his death, according to the inscription. If connoisseurs (who alone ought to decide this point) should be of this opinion, it may be suspected that the person that counterfeited the hand of the artist, might also subst.i.tute the writing; or we may at least conclude, that the etymology of Sanzio should be sought for in the word _Sanctis_, the name of the grandfather of Raffaello, not in _sancire_, (to divide fields or property). In tom. x.x.xi. of the Ant. Picene, a will is produced of Ser Simone di Antonio, in 1477, where a _Magister Baptista, qu. Peri Sanctis de Peris_, who is called _Pittor di grido e di eccellenza_, leaves his son Tommaso his heir, to whom is subst.i.tuted a son of Antonio his brother, of the name of Francesco. I may remark, that in this _Batista di Pier Sante de" Pieri_, we may find the surname of a family different from that of Sanzia. But on this subject I hope we shall shortly be favoured with more certain information by the Sig.
Arciprete Lazzari, who has obliged me with many valuable contributions to the present edition of this work.]
[Footnote 29: Condivi, in his Life of Bonarruoti, (num. 67.) a.s.sures us that Michaelangelo was not of a jealous temper, but spoke well of all artists, not excepting Raffaello di Urbino, "between whom and himself there existed, as I have mentioned, an emulation in painting; and the utmost that he said was, that Raffaello did not inherit his excellences from nature, but obtained them through study and application."]
[Footnote 30: See the Preface to the Life of Raffaello, by Vasari, _ediz. Senese_, p. 228, where the will is quoted.]
[Footnote 31: Vasari states, that that event occurred either whilst Michaelangelo was employed upon the Statues in S. Pietro in Vincoli, or whilst he was painting the vault of the Sistine Chapel, that is, some years afterwards, when Raffaello was in Rome. To this second opinion, which is the most common one, I formerly a.s.sented; but since, on perusal of a Brief of Julius II. (Lett. Pittoriche, tom. iii. p. 320) in which that Pope invites Michaelangelo back to Rome, and promises that _illaesus, inviolatusque erit_, I am inclined to believe that the Cartoon was finished in 1506, which is the date of the brief; so that Raffaello, if he could not see it on his first visit to Florence, might at least have done so on his second or third.]
[Footnote 32: See Vasari, ed. Sen. tom. v. p. 238, where we find the Letter written from him to one of his uncles, with all the provincialisms common to the inhabitants of Urbino and its neighbourhood.]
[Footnote 33: Malvasia, _Felsina Pittrice_, tom. i. p. 45. There are some facts, however, in opposition to this letter, and which seem to prove that Raffaello did not go to Rome until 1510. But the Sig. Abate Francesconi is now employed in rectifying the chronology of the Life and Works of Sanzio; and from his critical sagacity we may expect the solution of this difficulty.]
[Footnote 34: See Le Aggiunte al Vasari. Ed. Senese, p. 223.]
[Footnote 35: A sonnet by him is referred to by Sig. Piacenza, in his notes to Baldinucci, tom. xi. p. 371.]
[Footnote 36: In compliance with the wishes of Leo X. he made drawings of the buildings of Ancient Rome, and accompanied them with descriptions, employing the compa.s.s to ascertain their admeasurement. We owe this information to Sig. Abate Francesconi, who has restored to Sanzio a letter, formerly attributed to Castiglione. It is a sort of dedication of the work to Leo X.; but the work itself and the drawings are lost; and many of the edifices measured by Raffaello were destroyed in the following Pontificates. The Abate Morelli has made public a high eulogium on this work, by a contemporary pen, in the notes to the Notizia, page 210. It is written by one Marcantonio Michiel, who a.s.serts, that Raffaello had drawn the ancient buildings of Rome in such a manner, and shewn their proportions, forms, and ornaments so correctly, that whoever had inspected them might be said to have seen Ancient Rome.]
[Footnote 37: In a brief of Leo X. 1514, mentioned by Sig. Piacenza, tom. ii. p. 321.]
[Footnote 38:
Caesaris in nomen duc.u.n.tur carmina: Caesar Dum canitur, quaeso, Jupiter ipse vaces.
Prop. lib. iv. Eleg. vi.]
[Footnote 39: Vol. ii. p. 323 et seq.]
[Footnote 40: See the first letter of Crespi, Lettere Pittoriche, tom.
ii. p. 338.]
[Footnote 41: Mengs has observed, that Raffaello diligently studied the ba.s.sirelievi of the arches of t.i.tus and Constantine, which were on the arch of Trajan, and adopted from them his manner of marking the articulations of the joints, and a more simple and an easier mode of expressing the contour of the fleshy parts. Riflessioni sopra i tre gran Pittori, &c. cap. 1.]
[Footnote 42: Riflessioni su la bellezza e sul gusto della Pittura, parte iii. cap. 1, and see the _Osservazioni_ of the Cav. Azara on that tract, --. xii.]
[Footnote 43: A doubt has arisen on the exact time in which he painted the Prophet and the Sybils, and from the grandeur of their style doubts have been thrown on Vasari"s account, that they were painted anterior to 1511. But a painter who is the master of his art, elevates or lowers his style according to his subject. The Sybils are in Raffaello"s grandest style; and that they are amongst his earliest works, is proved from his having had Timoteo della Vite, as his a.s.sistant in them.]
[Footnote 44: Lett. Pittor. tom. v. p. 131.]
[Footnote 45: Commencing at p. 139.]
[Footnote 46: I do not find that any mention has been made of his picture in the possession of the Olivieri family at Pesaro, or of the one in the Basilica di Loreto in the Treasury, which seems to be the same which was formerly in the church of the Madonna del Popolo, or a copy of it. I have seen a similar subject in the Lauretana, belonging to the Signori Pirri, in Rome. At Sa.s.soferrato also, on the great altar of the church of the Capucins, there is a Virgin and child, said to be by him; but it is more probably by Fra Bernardo Catelani. There exist engravings of the two first, but I have not seen any of the last.]
[Footnote 47: Riflessioni sopra i tre gran Pittori, &c., cap. i. -- 2.]
[Footnote 48: Lo dico con questa condizione che V. S. si trova.s.se meco a far la scelta del meglio: ma essendo carestia e di buoni giudici e di belle donne, mi servo di una certa idea che mi viene in mente. Lett.
Pittor. tom. i. p. 84.]
[Footnote 49: Plin. Hist. Natur. lib. x.x.xv. cap. 10. Quintil. Inst.i.t.
Orat. xii. 10.]
[Footnote 50: Portraits of Raffaello are to be found in the Duomo, and in the Sacristy of Siena, in more than one picture; but it is doubtful whether by his own hand or that of Pinturicchio. That which is mentioned in the Guida di Perugia, as being in a picture of the Resurrection at the Conventuals, is said to be by Pietro Perugino: and in the Borghese gallery in Rome, there is one, supposed to be by the hand of Timoteo della Vite. The portrait in the gallery in Florence, by Da Vinci, bears some resemblance to Raffaello, but it is not he. Another which I have seen in Bologna, ought, perhaps, to be ascribed to Giulio Romano. One of the most authentic portraits of Raffaello, by his own hand, next to the one in the picture of S. Luke, is that in the Medici Collection in the _Stanza de" Pittori_, though this is not in his best manner.]
[Footnote 51: Idee de Peintre parfait, chap. xix.]
[Footnote 52: Engraved by Morghen. The three figures, the Madonna, the Infant, and St. John, appear almost alive. It should seem that Raffaello made several studies for this picture, and he painted one without the St. John, which remained for some time in Urbino. I saw a copy in the possession of the Calamini family, at Recanati, which was said to be by Baroccio, and at all events belonging to his school. I have seen the same subject in the Casa Olivieri, at Pesaro, and at Cortona, in the possession of another n.o.ble family, to whom it had pa.s.sed by inheritance from Urbino, and was considered to be by Raffaello. The faces in these are not so beautiful, nor the colours so fine; they are round, and in a larger circle, with some variations: I have also seen a copy in the Sacristy of S. Luigi de" Franzesi, in Rome, and in the Palazzo Giustiniani.]
[Footnote 53: Morto da Feltro sotto Alessandro VI., cominci a dipingere a grottesco, ma senza stucchi. Baglione, Vite, p. 21.]
[Footnote 54: The entrance into these baths was designedly and maliciously closed. Serlio, in speaking of the various arabesques in Pozzuolo, Baja, and Rome, says that they were injured or destroyed by the artists who had copied them, through a jealous feeling lest others should also avail themselves of the opportunity of studying them, (lib.
iv. c. 11). The names of these destroyers, which Serlio has suppressed, posterity has been desirous of recovering, and some have accused Raffaello, others Pinturicchio, and others Vaga, or Giovanni da Udine, or rather his scholars and a.s.sistants, "of whom," says Vasari, "there were an infinite number in every part of Italy." This subject is ably discussed by Mariotti, in _Lettera_ ix. p. 224, and in the _Memorie delle belle Arti_, per l"anno 1788, p. 24.]
[Footnote 55: It was charged on the office of the Piombo, or papal signet, when Sebastiano da Venezia was invested with it, and was a pension of three hundred scudi. Padre Federici observes that the one was designated Fra Sebastiano, but that the other was not called Fra Giovanni; nor is this remarkable, for a Bishop is called Monsignore, but the person who enjoys a pension charged upon a Bishop.r.i.c.k has not the same t.i.tle. It cannot however be deduced from this, as Federici wishes to do, that Sebastiano was first Frate di S. Domenico, by the name of F.
Marco Pensaben, and afterwards secularized by the Pope, and appointed to the signet, and that he retained the _Fra_ in consequence of his former situation.]
ROMAN SCHOOL.
EPOCH III.
_The art declines in consequence of the public calamities of Rome, and gradually falls into mannerism._
After the mournful events of the year 1527, Rome for some time remained in a state of stupor, contemplating her past misfortunes and her future destiny; and, like a vessel escaped from shipwreck, began slowly to repair her numerous losses. The soldiers of the besieging army, among other injuries committed in the Apostolic palace, had defaced some heads of Raffaello; and F. Sebastiano, an artist by no means competent to such a task, was employed to repair them. This, at least, was the opinion of t.i.tian, who was introduced to these works, and ignorant of the circ.u.mstances, asked Sebastiano what presumptuous wretch had had the audacity to attempt their restoration;[56] an impartial observation, against which even the patronage of Michelangiolo could not shield the artist. Paul III. was now in possession of the papal chair, and under his auspices the arts again began to revive. The decoration of the palace of Caprarola, and other works of Paul and his nephews, gave employment to the painters, and happy had these patrons been, could they have found a second Raffaello. Bonarruoti, as we have observed, was engaged by the Pope, and gave to the Roman School many n.o.ble specimens of art, though he formed but few scholars. Sebastiano, after the death of Raffaello, freed from all further compet.i.tion with that great artist, and honoured with the lucrative office of the papal signet, seemed disposed to rest from his labours; and as he had never, at any time, discovered great application, he now resigned himself to a life of vacant leisure, and Vasari does not mention with commendation any pupil of his school except Laureti.[57] Giulio Romano was now invited back to Rome, and the superintendence of the building of S. Peter"s offered to him, but death prevented his return to his native city. Perino del Vaga, however, repaired to Rome, and might, himself, have effected the restoration of art, if his magnanimity had corresponded with the sublimity of his mind. But he did not inherit the daring genius of his master. He communicated his instructions with jealousy, and worked with a spirit of gain, or to speak correctly, he did not paint himself, but undertaking works of more or less consequence, he allowed his scholars to execute them, often to the injury of his own reputation. He continued to secure to himself artists of the first talents, as we shall see; but this was done with the intention of making them dependant on him, and to prevent their interfering with his emoluments and commissions. But together with the good, he engaged also many indifferent and inferior artists, whence it happens, that in the chambers of the castle of S.
Angelo, and in other places, we meet with so marked a difference in many of his works. Few of his scholars attained celebrity. Luzio Romano is the most noted, and possessed a good execution. Of him there exists a frieze in the Palazzo Spada; and for some time, too, he had for an a.s.sistant Marcello Venusti of Mantua, a young man of great talents, but diffident, and probably standing in need of more instruction than Perino afforded him. He afterwards received some instructions from Bonarruoti, whose ideas he executed in an excellent manner, as I have mentioned before, and by his aid he became himself also a good designer.[58]
Perino, by these means, always abounded in work and in money. A similar traffic in the art was carried on by Taddeo Zuccaro, if we are to believe Vasari; and by Vasari himself, too, if we may be allowed to judge from his pictures.
The actual state of the art at this period may be ascertained from a view of the numerous works produced; but none are so distinguished as the paintings in the Sala Regia, commenced under Paul III., and scarcely finished, after a lapse of thirty years, in 1573. Of these Vaga had the direction, as Raffaello had formerly had, of the chambers of the Vatican. He planned the compartments, ornamented the ceiling, directed all the stuccos, cornices, devices, and large figures, and all in the style of a great master. He then applied himself to design the subjects for his pencil, and was employed on them when he was carried off by death in 1547. Through the partiality of Michelangiolo, he was succeeded by Daniel di Volterra, who had already worked in stucco, under his direction, in the same place. Volterra resolved to represent the donations of those sovereigns who had extended or consolidated the temporal dominion of the church, whence the chamber was called Sala dei Regi, and this idea was, in some degree, though with variations, continued by succeeding artists. Volterra was naturally slow and irresolute, and after painting the Deposition from the Cross, which we have mentioned as being executed with the a.s.sistance of Michelangiolo, he produced no more of these prodigies of art. He had indeed begun some designs, but on the death of the Pope, in 1549, he was compelled, in order to accommodate the conclave, to remove the scaffolding, and expose the work unfinished. It did not meet with public approbation, nor was it continued under Julius III., and still less under Paul IV., in whose reign the art was held in so little respect, that the apostles, painted by Raffaello in one of the chambers of the Vatican, were displaced.