Part 2

There can, likewise, be no doubt, that a painter of the name of Lorenzo, was one of these Venetians, whose altarpiece in St. Antony of Castello, to which is attached his name, with the date of 1358, _paid him three hundred gold ducats_, has been commended by Zanetti. Besides, we read inscribed on a picture belonging to the noble house of Ercolani, at Bologna, the words MANU LAURENTII DE VENETIIS, 1368; and there is every appearance of his being the author of the fresco in the church of Mezzaratta, not far from Bologna, representing Daniel in the lions' den; and bearing the signature of _Laurentius, P._ It is a work that bears no resemblance to the style of Giotto, and appears to have been completed about the year 1370. It is equally certain that Niccolo Semitecolo was a Venetian, he having also inscribed his name as we find it written upon a TRINITY, which represents the Virgin, along with some histories of St. Sebastian, still preserved in the chapter library of Padua:--"Nicoleto Semitecolo da Veniexia impense, 1367." The work is an excellent specimen of this school; the naked parts are tolerably well drawn, and the proportions of the figures, though sometimes extravagantly so, are bold and free; and what is more important to our present purpose, it discovers no resemblance to the style of Giotto, being inferior in point of design, though equal to him in regard to the colouring. Two other painters, whose style betrays nothing of Giotto, were discovered by Signor Sasso, in Venice, upon the strength of two altarpieces, to which they had affixed their names. Upon one, found in the convent of _Corpus Domini_, he read _Angelus pinxit_; and upon the other, also in the same place, _Katarinus pinxit_. While on this subject, I ought not to pass over the opinion of Baldinucci himself, who always appears to have respected the freedom and independence of the Venetian as opposed to the Florentine school, by refusing to insert the name of a single Venetian in his tree of Cimabue. He merely maintained, that the Venetian painters had improved their style by the labours of Angiol Gaddi, and of one Antonio, a Venetian, whom, in spite of the authority of Vasari, he has declared to be a Florentine; on which point we must refer to what has already been stated in the first volume (p. 61) of this work. Moreover, he asserts of the same Antonio, that he took up his residence at Venice, and thence acquired the appellation of Veneziano; but that he took his departure again, owing to the intrigues of the national professors, as much as to say, of a school formed anterior to his arrival. And so long anterior was it, indeed, that the whole state, as well as the adjacent places, abounded not less with pictures than with pupils, although few of their names with their productions have survived.[14]

Among these few is a Simon da Cusighe, who painted an altarpiece and a fresco, still remaining in his native parish, situated near the city of Belluno, where there exist memorials of one Pietro, and other artists of the thirteenth century, along with some very tolerably executed figures, bearing the epigraph of _Simon pinxit_. To these I add a native of Friuli, of whom there are no authentic remains beyond Gemona, where he painted the facade of the dome, and under a picture of the martyrdom of I know not what saint, appears his name written, MCCCXXXII. MAGISTER NICOLAUS PINTOR ME FECIT. To this artist is ascribed, by some writers, that vast and meritorious production, still in such a fine state of preservation, ornamenting the dome of Venzone, and which represents the solemn scene of the Consecration; but its author is a matter of mere conjecture, founded in this instance upon the vicinity of the place and time, and resemblance of manner. There are also Pecino and Pietro de Nova, who employed their talents, during a period of many years subsequent to 1363, in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, at Bergamo. But these, like the artist of Padua before mentioned, approach very nearly the composition of Giotto, and possibly might have imbibed such a taste at Milan.[15]

The splendor of Venetian painting becomes more strikingly manifest in the fifteenth century; a period that was gradually preparing the way for the grand manner of the Titians and the Giorgioni. The new style took its rise in one of the islands called Murano; but it was destined to attain its perfection in Venice. I first recognized the work of one of the oldest of these artists, subscribing himself, _Quiricius de Muriano_, in the studio of Signor Sasso. It represents our Saviour in a sitting posture, at whose feet stands a veiled devotee; but there is no mark by which to ascertain its age. There is, likewise, of uncertain date, yet still very ancient, a Bernardino da Murano, of whose productions Zanetti saw nothing more than a rude altarpiece. An Andrea da Murano flourished about the period 1400, whose style, whatever it may retain of harsh and dry, neither superior in composition, nor in choice of features to that of his predecessors, discovers him to have been tolerably skilful in design, even in regard to the extremities, and in placing his figures well in the canvass.

There remains in his native place, at San Pier Martire, an altarpiece painted by his hand, in which a St. Sebastian forms so conspicuous a figure for the beauty of its torso, that Zanetti suspects it must have been copied from some ancient statue. It is he who introduced the art into the house of the Vivarini, his compatriots, who in a continued line of succession preserved the school of Murano for nearly a century; and who produced as rich a harvest of their labours in Venice, as did the Campi afterwards in the city of Cremona, or the Procaccini in Milan. I shall treat of them with brevity, but with such new sources of information, as will at once serve to correct and amplify what has already been written.

The first among the Vivarini mentioned by historians is Luigi, of whom a painting at Santi Giovanni e Paolo, has been cited by them, which represents our Redeemer bearing the cross upon his shoulders. The work has been a good deal retouched, and there has been added to it another portion, which gives the name of the author, dated 1414. Not being an autograph, we are led to suspect some kind of mistake attaching either to the name or the date; there having been another Luigi Vivarini, as we shall shew, towards the close of the century. The one in question, then, might probably be an ancestor of the latter, though it be difficult to persuade ourselves of it, as there remains no other superscription, or notice of any of that name so ancient.

Next to this artist, according to Ridolfo and Zanetti, are to be enumerated Giovanni and Antonio Vivarini, who flourished about the year 1440. The authority they adduce for this, is an altarpiece in San Pantaleone, which bears the inscription of _Zuane e Antonio da Muran pense 1444_. But this Giovanni,[16] if I mistake not, is the same who signs his name on another picture in Venice, _Joannes de Alemania et Antonius de Muriano pinxit_; or as it is thus written in Padua, _Antonio de Muran e Zohan Alamanus pinxit_. Giovanni, therefore, was a companion of Antonio, a German by birth; and traces of a foreign style are clearly perceptible in his paintings. The reason of his omitting to insert his birthplace in the picture at San Pantaleone, arose, I suspect, from the fact of his name and acquaintance with Antonio being too well known to admit of doubt. After the year 1447 there is no more mention made of Giovanni, but only of Antonio; sometimes alone, sometimes together with some other of the Vivarini. Thus, his name is subscribed alone in San Antonio Abate di Pesaro, upon an altarpiece of the titular saint, surrounded by the figures of three young martyrs, with some smaller paintings attached; the production of a very animated colourist, and displaying forms inferior to none in the school of Murano. I have seen two other specimens, in which he is mentioned together with a second Vivarino. The least excellent of these is to be found in San Francesco Grande, at Padua, consisting of a Madonna, with some saints, in various compartments; and, at the foot of it, is the following memorandum, _Anno 1451, Antonius et Bartholomeus fratres de Murano pinxerunt hoc opus_. Similar to this, the two brothers had produced another the year preceding, in the Certosa of Bologna, where it is still in a high state of preservation, beyond any other specimen I have seen belonging to this family. There is much worthy of commendation in each figure of the whole piece; features dignified and devout; appropriate dresses; care in the disposition of the hair and beards, united to a colouring warm and brilliant.

According to what appears, Bartolommeo must have been held of less account than Antonio, until the discovery of painting in oil being introduced into Venice, he became one among the first to profit by it, and, towards the period in which the two Bellini appeared, was held in pretty high repute.

The first specimen of his painting in oil exists at S. Giovanni e Paolo, not far from the gate, and exhibits, among other saints, P. San Agostino, with an indication of the year 1473. From that period he continued to distinguish himself, producing a great number of pieces both in oil and in water colour, sometimes with more, and sometimes with less care, but always in the ancient taste for subdividing the altarpiece into several parts, in each of which he represented separate heads or entire figures. In these he often marked the name of Vivarino, with the year of their production; and occasionally he has added a finch or linnet by way of allusion to his family name. His last work, bearing the date of the year, is a Christ risen from the dead, at San Giovanni, in Bragora, where Boschini read the date of 1498, which is now no longer apparent; but it is a piece which, in every part, may be said to vie with that of the best Venetian artists who flourished during the same period.

Contemporary with him was a Luigi of the same name, one of whose productions was seen by Zanetti, in a collection of paintings, with the date of 1490, and as appeared to him, strongly approaching, in point of taste, to the best style of Bartolommeo. To Luigi, also, must undoubtedly be ascribed the altarpiece, which, in San Francesco di Trevigi, bears his name. There is another at the Battuti, in Belluno, representing the saints Piero, Girolamo, and some others, a work which cost that school 100 gold ducats, besides the expenses of the artist, who has attached to it his name. But superior to every other of his existing specimens, is that fine picture in the school of San Girolamo, at Venice, in which he represented a history of the titular saint, in emulation of Giovanni Bellino, whom he here equalled, and of Carpaccio, whom he surpassed. He has drawn the saint in the act of caressing a lion, while several monks are seen flying in terror at the sight. The composition is very fine; the passions are tolerably well pourtrayed, the colours as soft and delicate as in any other of the Vivarini; the architecture solid, and in the ancient taste, while the epoch is more modern than that which could be ascribed to the supposed Luigi, the elder. Such is our exposition of the whole series of the School of Murano, up to the period of its greatest improvement, so as to bring it under one point of view. I shall now, therefore, resume the thread of my narrative, relating to the elder artists of the fourteenth century, who competed with the oldest of the school of Murano, until the era of painting in oil; and I shall afterwards proceed to treat apart of the more modern.

In the early part of the century, an artist of the name of Gentile da Fabriano, had been employed in the public palace at Venice, highly distinguished in his time, but of whom I must not here repeat what has been said in the first volume of this work. He there depicted a naval battle scene, a production greatly extolled in former times, which has long since perished. He produced, also, some disciples, as we find mention of a Jacopo Nerito, from Padua, who, in a painting at San Michele di Padova, according to Rossetti, subscribes himself one of his pupils. Nasocchio di Bassano, the elder, is to be ranked also, either as one of his scholars or his imitators, if, indeed, a small picture pointed out to me by the late Signor Verci was by his hand.

Among other Venetians, Jacopo Bellini, at once the father and the master of Gentile and Giovanni of the same name, of whom more hereafter, was certainly a pupil of Gentile da Fabriano. Jacopo, however, is better known by the celebrity of his sons, than by his own works, at this time either destroyed or unknown. He had painted in the school of S. Giovanni Evangelista at Venice, and in the chapel of the Gatta Melata, at the Santo di Padova, about 1456; but these labours survive only in history, nor have I met with any other specimen besides a Madonna, discovered by Sig. Sasso, bearing the signature of its author. The style appears taken from that of Squarcione, to which he is supposed to have applied himself in his more advanced years.

There was also another Jacopo in very high repute,[17] called Jacobello del Fiore, who has been falsely accused by Vasari, of having drawn his figures all resting on the tip of their toes, in the manner of the Greeks. His father, Francesco, was considered in the light of a Coryphaeus of the art, and his tomb is still to be seen at Santi Giovanni e Paolo, with a figure of him in his toga, and a commendatory epitaph in Latin verse. No works of his, however, are to be seen in Venice,[18] a dittico, or small altar, with his name having been conveyed to London, bearing the date of 1412. It was obtained by the Chevalier Strange, together with some other productions of the old Venetian artists. The son of Francesco rose to a still higher degree of celebrity. He began to make himself known as early as 1401, by producing an altarpiece at San Cassiano di Pesaro, in which city I discovered another, with the date of 1409, and both bear the signature of _Jacometto de Flor_. A much nobler work is a coronation of the Virgin, in the cathedral of Ceneda, extremely rich in figures, insomuch as to have deserved the name of the "Painting of Paradise," in a MS. of the lives of the bishops of that place, which is preserved in the episcopal residence, and declares the work to have been executed, _ab eximio illius temporis pictore Jacobello de Flore_, 1432, at the expense of the bishop, Ant. Correr. There is a Madonna, indisputably by his hand, in possession of Sig. Girolamo Manfrini, painted in 1436, besides the _Giustizia_, drawn between two archangels, in the _Magistrato del Proprio_, bearing the date of 1421. I may venture to say that few artists of that time equalled him; both on account of his having few rivals who had so early ventured to attempt drawing figures as large as the life, and because of his power of conferring upon them a certain grace and dignity, and, where called for, a vigour and ease rarely to be met with in other paintings. The two lions which he represented as symbols of his _Giustizia_ (Justice), are truly grand, though the rest of the figures would have appeared to more advantage had they been less loaded with ornaments, and in particular the draperies glowing with gold lace, according to the custom of his age. He had a rival in Giacomo Morazone, known by an altarpiece seen in the island of St. Elena, of which I shall have to speak elsewhere.

Two pupils of Jacobello are recorded by Ridolfi, one of whom, Donato, is superior to his master in point of style, and the other, Carlo Crivelli, of whom the capital can boast only one or two pieces, and of whom little mention is made in Venetian history. It would appear that he long resided out of his native place, and in the Marca Trevigiana, from which circumstance we find him repeatedly named in the _Storia Picena_, in the _Guida di Ascoli_, and in the catalogue of Fabrianese paintings. At San Francesco di Matelica, I saw an altarpiece and _grado_ by his hand, with his name in the following inscription--_Carolus Crivellus Venetus miles pinxit_, as well as another with his name at the Osservanti, in Macerata, and a third which bears the year 1476, in possession of the Cardinal Zelada. He is an artist more remarkable for his force of colouring than for his correctness of design: and his principal merit consists in those little history pieces, in which he has represented beautiful landscapes, and given to his figures grace, motion, and expression, with some traces of the colouring of the School of Perugia. Hence his productions have occasionally been taken for those of Pietro, as in the instance of that in Macerata; and if I mistake not, such an opinion was entertained, even by the learned Father Civalli, (p. 60). In Piceno, likewise, in Monsanmartino, or in Penna S. Giovanni, there remain altarpieces by Vittorio Crivelli, a Venetian, most probably of the same family, and produced in the years 1489 and 90, from which period I lose sight of him, whether owing to his early decease, or his having set out in pursuit of better fortune into foreign parts.

Hitherto we have examined only the productions of the capital and of the annexed island. But in each of the other cities, now comprehended in the state, there flourished painters during the same period, guided by maxims differing both from those of Venice and of Murano. The School of Bergamo had even then made distinguished progress under the direction of the two Nova, who died at the commencement of the century; and mention is made of a Commenduno, one of their pupils, besides some other contemporaries, whose works, however, cannot, with any degree of certainty, be pointed out. The same may be said of those in the adjacent city of Brescia, which could then, also, boast of possessing some excellent artists. Of these, there is nothing more than the name now remaining, yet Brandolin Testorino and Ottaviano Brandino are names placed in competition with that of Gentile di Fabriano, and, perhaps, they are preferred to him. The former was supposed to have been engaged along with Altichiero, in ornamenting the great hall in Padua, entitled _Sala de' Giganti_.[19]

Subsequent to both of these appeared Vincenzio Foppa, of Brescia, founder of an ancient school at Milan, of which I shall treat more at length in the following book. Vasari makes mention of a Vincenzio da Brescia, or Vincenzio Verchio, who is the same Vincenzo Civerchio di Crema, commended by Ridolfo, and so much admired by the French in the capture of Crema, that they fixed upon one of his pictures, then ornamenting the public palace, to be presented to their king, and to this artist we shall also again allude.

About the commencement of the fifteenth century there flourished, in Verona, an artist of the name of Stefano,[20] declared, as it appears to me, by Vasari, sometimes a native of Verona, sometimes of Zevio, a territory adjacent to the former. The same author makes honourable mention of him in several places, exalting him above the best disciples of Angiolo Gaddi, to whose style, judging from what I have myself observed at San Fermo and elsewhere, he added a certain dignity and beauty of form, while such was his excellence in frescos, as to be extolled by Donatello beyond any of the artists who were then known for similar compositions in those parts.[21]

The Commendatore del Pozzo brings his labours down as far as the year 1463, an incredible assertion, as applied to a scholar of Gaddi. To this period might better be referred Vincenzio di Stefano, apparently one of his sons, of whom nothing survives but his name, and the tradition of having conferred the first lessons of the art upon Liberale.

Highly distinguished, on the other hand, both by the consent of the Veronese and of foreigners, is the name of Vittor Pisanello; although there exists great confusion of dates in his history. Vasari makes him a disciple of Castagno, who died about the year 1480; yet del Pozzo informs us that he has in his house a holy figure, with the annexed signature of Vittore, and dated 1406, most probably before the birth of Castagno. Again we are told by Oretti that he was in possession of one of his medals, representing the Sultan Mahomet, struck in the year 1481, a supposition which, admitting the picture of Pozzo, we are unable to reconcile to facts, so that the medal was, perhaps, taken from some painting of Pisanello, coloured at a former time. To whatever master Vittore may have been indebted, certain it is that several of his too partial admirers have placed him above Masaccio, in regard to the services rendered by him towards the progress of the art, though impartial judges will not refuse to give him a station near him. The whole of his labours, both in Venice and in Rome, have now perished. At Verona, also, little remains; even that noble piece of San Eustachio, so highly extolled by Vasari himself, having been destroyed; and his _Nunziata_, at San Fermo, being greatly defaced by time, in which, however, is still visible a country house, thrown into such admirable perspective, as to delight the beholder. There remain several little altarpieces, containing histories of San Bernardino, finished in the style of the miniaturists, in the sacristy of San Francesco; but they are crude in their colouring, and the figures more than usually long and dry. The _Guide_ of the city announces them as the productions of Pisanello; but there is no authority for this, and upon the strength of a date of 1473, which is seen upon one of them, I do not scruple to pronounce them by another hand. He is commended by Facio, (p. 47) for his almost poetical style of expression; and there is a specimen of an effort at caricature, with which Vittore embellished his historic painting of Frederick Barbarossa, in the ducal palace at Venice. He is, moreover, praised by the same author for his skill in drawing horses and other animals, in which he surpassed every other artist. His name is not unknown to the antiquaries; many medals struck by him, of different princes, being found in museums, which acquired for him, in an equal degree with his pictures, the esteem and applauses of Guarino, of Vespasiano Strozza, of Biondo, and of several other distinguished scholars.

In the adjacent city of Vicenza, resided a Jacopo Tintorello, strongly resembling Vittore in his style of colouring, however inferior to him in the perfection of his design, as far as we are enabled to judge from a picture of the Saviour, with a crown of thorns, exhibited at Santa Corona; a piece which reflects credit upon that school. It is yet more highly honoured by an _Epiphany_, painted in San Bartolommeo, by Marcello Figolino, an artist commemorated by Ridolfi, under the name of Giovanni Batista, and who flourished, according to his account, at the period of the two Montagna. He must, however, at that time, have been far advanced in years, if it be true that the era of his birth preceded that of Gian Bellini.[22] His manner is undoubtedly original; so much so, that I find nothing resembling it, either in Venice or elsewhere; it embraces great diversity of countenance, and of costume, skilful gradation of light and shade, with landscape and perspective; and is remarkable for ornament, and the finish and smoothness of every part. It was fully entitled to render its author the father of a new epoch in the history of art; if, indeed, we are to believe him, which does not sufficiently appear, to be as ancient as has been affirmed.