Part 26

Antonio Balestra of Verona was at first devoted to a mercantile life, until at the age of twenty-one, after studying in Venice under Bellucci, and thence passing to Bologna, and afterwards to Rome, under Maratta, he selected the best from every school, uniting a variety of beauties in a style of his own, which partakes least of all of the Venetian. He is an artist of judgment and high finish, well versed in design, of a rapid hand, lively and animated, but always with a solidity of talent that makes us respect him. He taught in Venice and in the college of La Carita, where he painted the Nativity of our Lord, and the Taking down from the Cross, while he competes equally well with the first artists of his time in other places. Commissions from foreign courts and the cities of the state, never allowed him to be idle. He was particularly employed at Padua in an altarpiece for the church del Santo, representing Santa Chiara. He painted also a good deal for his native place; his picture of San Vincenzo at the Domenicans,[89] being one of the finest altarpieces he ever produced, and one of the best preserved, for his method of colouring with boiled oils has been found injurious to many of his pieces. Such as he painted, however, in oil less boiled, have better resisted the effects of time. Many of these figures are in possession of the Conti Gazzola, ornamenting one of their halls, and in particular a very beautiful one of Mercury. He promoted the reputation of the Venetian School, both by his lectures and example, besides affording an excellent imitator in Gio. Batista Mariotti, and in his pupil Giuseppe Nogari, a painter of portraits, as well as of half-length figures, held in much esteem, insomuch as to recommend him, for a great length of time, to the service of the court of Turin. In pieces of composition, such as his San Piero, placed in the cathedral of Bassano, he appears a respectable artist, and somewhat ambitious of reconciling his master's style with that of Piazzetta. Another Venetian of the name of Pietro Longhi, first instructed by Balestra, and afterwards by Crespi, aimed at pleasing the eye in collections, by those humourous representations of masks, of conversazioni, landscapes, &c. which we find in various noble houses. Angelo Venturini, also a Venetian, is mentioned in the Guida of Zanetti, for his paintings in the church of Gesu e Maria, of which he adorned the ceiling, and various portions of the walls. Another pupil of Balestra's, in Verona, was Carlo Salis, who approached very near his style, more particularly in the handling of his colours. He prosecuted his first studies in Bologna, under Giuseppe dal Sole. Some of his pictures are also to be met with in the state, such as his San Vincenzio, in the act of administering to the sick at Bergamo, a piece finely mellowed, and more than commonly spirited. An artist named Cavalcabo, a native of a district in Roveredo, was instructed by Balestra, and afterwards by Maratta. In the choir of the Carmine at his native place, he left behind him a very beautiful altarpiece, representing the Holy Simone Stoch, with four lateral pieces of great merit. For a more particular account of these and other works by this artist, we may refer the reader to his life, written by the Cavalier Vannetti.

The whole of the names, however, we have here mentioned, scarcely excepting that of Balestra himself, have been thrown into the shade by the talent of the Conte Pietro Rotari. He was honoured with the title of painter to her court, by the empress of all the Russias, and in her dominions he closed the period of his days. This very elegant artist, who devoted many years to the art of design, succeeding in attaining a grace of feature, a delicacy of outline, united to a vivacity of motion and expression, and to a natural and easy mode of drapery, that would have left him second to none of his age, had he possessed, in an equal degree of perfection, the art of colouring. But his productions often partake so much of the chiaroscuro, or at least of a strong ash colour, as to render them remarkable among all. Some, indeed, have attributed this defect to want of clearness of sight, while others conjecture it must have been owing to his long practice in design, previous to his attempting colours, in the same manner as Polidoro da Caravaggio and the Cavalier Calabrese are known to have failed as colourists, falling like him into a weak and languid tone. The education he received from Balestra may also have tended to produce it, as both he and the disciples of Maratta were somewhat addicted to a certain duskiness of style, which we may particularly observe in several examples seen at Naples, where he resided for some time. Whatever it be owing to, there still prevails a repose and harmony in that melancholy expression of his colouring, that is far from unpleasing, in particular where he affords somewhat warmer touches to his tints. This he appears to have done in his picture of a Nunziata at Guastalla, in that of San Lodovico in the church del Santo at Padua, and in a Nativity of the Virgin at San Giovanni, in the same city. This last specimen, indeed, is almost unequalled in its attractions, and seems to authorize the praises bestowed upon Rotari by a poet, "that he resembled his fellow citizen Catullus in being nursed by the Graces," a species of eulogy applicable also to Balestra and to other Veronese artists.

Santo Prunati was contemporary with Marchesini and Balestra, and after receiving the instructions of Voltolino and Falcieri in Verona, he attended those of Loth in Venice. Better to acquire superior correctness and dignity of manner, he next proceeded to Bologna. In that school he found the taste in colouring that he wanted, at once soft and natural. In the design, and in the expression of his heads, he displays more of the naturalist, if I mistake not, than any of those who preceded him. He was engaged also for larger compositions, in which he distinguished himself, both in his own district and elsewhere, and left behind him a son named Michelangiolo, who pursued, as far as lay in his power, the footsteps of his father. In the cathedral of Verona, however, is one of his pictures, placed near the San Francesco di Sales of his father, which serves to mark the wide difference that exists between them.

In the same school, along with Michelangiolo, studied Gio. Bettino Cignaroli, an artist instructed also by Balestra. Until about the year 1770 he ranked among the first of his time, receiving very flattering invitations from foreign courts, to which he invariably preferred the convenience of his own house and country. The prices he was in the habit of attaching to his works, were, nevertheless, those of a court painter; and many were executed for the principal royal galleries, as well as for the cities of the state, and those of other parts of Italy; but which, we must admit, are by no means of equal merit. I omit his paintings in fresco, on account of his having abandoned that branch of the art, owing to his state of health, while yet young, though not until he had afforded specimens of his powers in the noble house of Labia at Venice, during a four years' residence there. It is his pictures in oil, of which we here speak, and to which he owed his great reputation. The one at Pontremoli, however, representing, as it is said, a San Francesco in the act of receiving the marks of Christ, and extremely well executed, I have not seen. His San Zorzi at Pisa stands conspicuous among a number of excellent pencils, all employed in the ornament of that single cathedral. Perhaps his finest is his Journey into Egypt, seen at San Antonio Abate in Parma. In this he has represented the Virgin with the Holy Child, in the act of passing a narrow bridge, while S. Joseph appears engaged in assisting them to cross it in safety. In the countenance and whole action of the saint, his anxiety for them is strongly depicted, which is beautifully expressed by his disregarding a part of his mantle, fallen from his shoulders into the water below, an image equally skilful and natural in every point of view. The rest of the picture is also in his best style. The angels in attendance, the Divine Infant, the Holy Virgin, all drawn, as he so well knew how, with a sedate and dignified beauty, in the usual manner of Maratta. In some points, indeed, Cignaroli much resembled him; in certain attitudes, in a peculiar sobriety of composition, in a certain choice and vicinity of colours, though not in their just and equal tone. His fleshes, too much mannered with green, in a few places touched with red, render his colouring less agreeable to admirers of what is true, while his chiaroscuro, sometimes sought for beyond the limits of nature, is apt to produce an effect in his paintings, not so pleasing to the judgment as to the eye. He often displays novelty in the individual parts, availing himself of architecture, of sea views, and of landscape, in a manner above common; besides introducing into his compositions, for the most part of a scriptural character, the playful figures of cherubims, with other enlivening incidents. This artist was indisputably possessed of a fine genius, and born in times favourable to the eminence he enjoyed. Memoirs of him were collected and published by the celebrated Padre Bevilacqua dell'Oratorio in the year 1771, and eulogies were pronounced upon him both in prose and verse, by a number of literary characters connected with that city, so highly polished and so grateful to such of its citizens as reflect honour upon their native place. A collection of these was subsequently made, and put forth in the year 1772, and from such publications it would appear that few artists had received equal honours, during their lifetime, from the great, particularly from the Emperor Joseph II., who was used to declare, "that he had beheld two very rare sights in Verona--one the Amphitheatre, and the other the most celebrated painter in Europe." He appears, likewise, to have been an artist of great learning, as well as fond of conversing with learned men; he was acquainted with philosophical systems, wrote Tuscan poetry, relished the Roman classics, besides producing treatises upon his own art, written with so much taste and sound judgment, that we have only to regret, for the sake of the art he loved, the too sparing use he made of such talents. The academy, on which he bestowed the whole of his works upon Painting, after his decease, still preserves his bust along with his eulogy, a farther honour conferred upon him by the liberality of his country. He left several pupils, among whom Giandomenico, his brother, produced some paintings in Bergamo that have been commended by Pasta. The Padre Felice Cignaroli, Minore Osservante, is an artist likewise worthy of mention. He painted little, and his masterpiece appears in the refectory of San Bernardino, his convent at Verona, consisting of a Supper of Emmaus, in which, though less studied, he displays no less invention than his brothers.

Next to these, who escaped oblivion as belonging to the family of Cignaroli, an artist named Giorgio Anselmi deserves best to be put upon record, and in particular for his painting of the Cupola of San Andrea at Mantua, ably executed in fresco: at one time he was the pupil of Balestra. Marco Marcola was an almost universal artist, rapid in his labours, abundant in his inventions, though I am unable to learn who had been his master. Tiepolo gave instructions to Francesco Lorenzi, distinguished both for his frescos and his oils, and always by his adherence to his master's example. There are various ceilings painted by his hand in Verona, and Brescia presents a Holy Family, all of which display an able artist, according to the manner of the age.

In inferior branches of the art, there flourished, during this period, professors of much repute. The art of drawing in crayons rose to a high degree of excellence, through the genius of a distinguished lady of the name of Rosalba Carriera,[90] whose paintings in miniature have been highly commended by Orlandi. She next proceeded to the use of oils, but finally devoted her talents to that of crayons. So great was her progress in this branch that her specimens in point of force were often equal to oil pieces. They were in much request from the period in which she flourished, both in Italy and other parts; nor did they merely please by their clearness and beauty of colouring, but were remarkable for the grace and dignity of design, with which she animated every thing she drew. Her Madonnas and other scriptural subjects at once unite elegance and majesty of manner, while her portraits continued to increase in value without losing any thing of their truth. We meet with another excellent portrait paintress in Niccola Grassi, pupil to Cassana, of Genoa, and a rival of Rosalba. Nor was she unequal to works of invention, one of the most extensive of which adorns the church of San Valentino in Udine, where she painted the Assumption in the ceiling, a fine piece on the large altar, and drew figures for other pictures of various saints belonging to the Order of the Serviti. Pietro Uberti, son of Domenico, an artist of mediocrity, is celebrated in the Guida of Zanetti for his portraits, of which he produced eight, representing the Avogadori of his times, for the Avogaria or courthouse, which was considered a very honourable commission, bestowed formerly upon Paolo de' Freschi, Domenico Tintoretto, Tinelli, Bombelli, artists all celebrated in the same career. Orlandi bestows great commendation upon Gio. Batista Canziani of Verona, distinguished likewise in this branch, and who, on being banished from his native place for an act of homicide, continued to exercise it with success in Bologna.

I do not recollect to have seen the landscapes of Pecchio in Verona, though the fine encomium bestowed upon him by Balestra, in one of his _Lettere Pittoriche_, leads me to hold him in high esteem. In the adjacent parts at Salo appeared Gio. Batista Cimaroli, a pupil of Calza, who was much admired, both by foreigners and natives at Venice. Among landscape painters I find in several galleries the name of Formentini, the figures of whose pieces were from the pencil of Marchesini. D. Giuseppe Roncelli of Bergamo is another artist who acquired reputation, and whose virtues procured for him, from the pen of Mazzoleni, the honour of a life, while his singular skill in depicting nocturnal conflagrations, as well as landscapes, induced Celesti to add figures to them. In Padua the landscapes of Marini were in high repute, to which Brusaferro likewise added variety with his figures. Still more than these Luca Carlevaris, an excellent painter of landscape at Udine, rose into notice, no less distinguished also by his perspectives and sea views. Public specimens of his labours still remain at Venice, though not so numerous as in private houses, particularly in possession of the Zenobri family, who so far patronized his talents as to procure for him the name of Luca di Ca Zenobrio. To him succeeded the nephew of Sebastiano Ricci, named Marco, who, pursuing the safe career chalked out by Titian, and availing himself of the delightful site of his native place at Belluno, became one of the ablest landscape painters belonging to the Venetian School. It would be no exaggeration to say that few before his time distinguished themselves with equal force of truth, and that those who succeeded him have never equalled him in this respect. In order to estimate his worth, we are not to consult such landscapes as he painted for sale and disposed of to dealers; nor those executed in water colours upon goatskin, which, though very pleasing, are wanting in solidity. We ought to consult only his oil productions, conducted with far more care, and more commonly to be met with in England than in Italy. Indeed he had a much more extended taste than he displayed in his works. The two brother artists named Valeriano, declared that he had afforded them the most enlightened views of the art. These were Domenico, a painter of perspectives, and Giuseppe, a figure painter, both employed in ornamenting different churches, and more particularly theatres, in Venice, and indeed throughout Italy and other parts of Europe. Francesco Zuccarelli passed a great portion of his life in the city of Venice, an artist already recorded by us among the Florentines, and by whose example Giuseppe Zais was formed as a landscape painter, being particularly employed in that branch by the British Consul Smith, a distinguished patron of youthful genius devoted to the art. In point of invention he was more varied and copious than his master, but inferior to him in the mellowness of his tints. He had acquired from Simonini, who also resided during a long period at Venice, the art of painting battle pieces, in which he shewed equal skill. But he failed to sustain either his own dignity or that of his art, and giving himself up to carelessness and dissipation, he died a common mendicant in the hospital of Trevigi.

Carlevaris and Ricci are names likewise highly esteemed in architectural painting. Several specimens of this are to be seen in possession of his Excellency Girolamo Molin, placed as it were in competition with each other in one of the halls. If we compare them, the former will appear somewhat languid and monotonous, although he must be allowed to be an accurate observer of perspective, and succeeds in harmonizing his figures well with the picture. The latter, however, displays more strength, partaking of the erudite taste of Viviano, while the figures introduced into it by his uncle are full of pictorial fire and attraction, and greatly add to its worth. But both of these, to use the language of Dante, were afterwards _cacciati di nido_, driven from their nest, by Antonio Canal, more generally called Canaletto. Sprung from a painter of theatres of the name of Bernardo, he embraced the profession of his father, attaining to a novelty of design, and a promptness of hand in this branch, that were afterwards of great use to him in painting innumerable smaller pictures for private ornament. Disgusted with his first profession, he removed while still young to Rome, where he wholly devoted himself to drawing views from nature, and in particular from ancient ruins. On returning into Venice he continued in like manner to take views of that city, views that nature and art seem to have vied with each other in rendering the most novel and magnificent in the world. A great part he drew exactly as he saw them, a pleasing illusion for the satisfaction of those who were never so fortunate as to behold the Adriatic Queen with their own eyes. He moreover composed a great number of inventive pieces, forming a graceful union of the modern and the antique, of truth and of fancy together. Several of these he produced for Algarotti; but the most novel and instructive of any, as it seems to me, is the production in which the grand bridge of Rialto, designed by Palladio, instead of that which at present is seen, overlooks the great canal, crowned beyond with the cathedral of Vicenza, and the Palazzo Chericato, Palladio's own works, along with other choice edifices, disposed according to the taste of that learned writer, who has so much contributed to improve that of all Italy, and even beyond Italy itself. For the greater correctness of his perspectives, Canaletto made use of the optic camera, though he obviated its defects, especially in the tints of the airs. The first indeed to point out the real use of it, he limited it only to what was calculated to afford pleasure. He aimed at producing great effect, and in this partakes somewhat of Tiepolo, who occasionally introduced figures into his pieces for him. In whatever he employs his pencil, whether buildings, waters, clouds, or figures, he never fails to impress them with a vigorous character, always viewing objects in their most favourable aspect. When he avails himself of a certain pictorial license, he does it with caution, and in such a way that the generality of spectators consider it quite natural, while true judges only are sensible of its art, an art that he possessed in a very eminent degree.

His nephew and pupil, Bernardo Bellotto, approached so nearly to his style, that it is with difficulty their respective pieces are distinguished. He also visited Rome, though when Orlandi bestowed his encomiums upon him in his work, he was at Dresden, and it is uncertain whether he again returned into Italy. Francesco Guardi was recently esteemed a second Canaletto, his views of Venice having attracted the admiration not only of Italy but of foreign parts, yet with such persons alone who are satisfied with the spirit, the taste, and the fine effect which he invariably studied; as in other points, in accuracy of proportions, and in judgment as regards the art, he cannot pretend to vie with his master. Several others likewise excelled in this species of painting, whose pictures I saw in the Algarotti collection and in other places; such as Jacopo Marieschi, who was also a good figurist, and Antonio Visentini, whose views were ornamented with the figures of Tiepolo and Zuccherelli. Gio. Colombini of Trevigi, pupil to Bastian Ricci, whose Pecile was the Domenican convent in that place, succeeded in his perspectives, in giving illusion to the eye, and in the masterly gradation of the different objects of view. The figures he has introduced are his own, though he was less skilful in this branch. He filled that place with his portraits, introducing another family as it were of painted Domenicans, and not without some appearance of caricature.

In other minor branches of the art, the flowers of Domenico Levo were extremely admired. He was pupil to Felice Bigi of Parma, who opened school in Verona. To his we may add those of one Caffi and a few other natives, though the most choice collectors pride themselves upon the specimens of Gaspero Lopez, a Neapolitan. Thus at least he subscribes himself in one of his most beautiful works, in possession of the Conti Lecchi at Brescia, where, as well as in the capital, he resided during a long period. About the middle of the century there appeared one of his imitators, named in various collections Duramano, an artist somewhat too much given to mannerism.

Both the flowers and birds of Count Giorgio Durante of Brescia were eagerly sought after, no less on account of their exact imitation of the life, than for their taste of composition, and the truly beautiful and picturesque attitudes in which they were drawn. They are rarely to be met with beyond Brescia, though several noble Venetian families, and among these that of Nani, possess a few specimens; but the best, perhaps, of all is to be seen in the royal court at Turin. The name of Ridolfo Manzoni is distinguished in the same line of composition; he was a native of Castelfranco, and several of his little pictures in oil, in the best taste, are there found in possession of different individuals. But he derived his chief reputation, as well as profit, from his miniature productions. In the History of Painting in the Frioul, we meet with the name of another artist, Paolo Paoletti, a native of Padua. He passed his early youth in Udine, and was employed for many years in the house of the Conti Caiselli. Although more particularly celebrated in his flowers, he drew with great truth all kind of fruits, herbs, fishes, and game. The family in which he was domesticated possesses quite a museum of these rarities, and numerous specimens are met with in other hands, both within and beyond the limits of the Frioul. In his flower paintings he is compared by Altan even with the celebrated Segers, an extent of liberality in which I by no means agree.