Thus, much in the same manner as we judge from the facade of the style of a whole edifice in the gothic taste, the reader may gather, from this very loaded title, the exact nature of Boschini's work. It is, indeed, written in the most verbose style of the Seicentisti; a mixture of unsound reasoning, strange allegory, tame allusions, frivolous conceits invented on every name, and phraseology that surpasses even that of Ciampoli and Melosio; for these at least wrote in the Italian dialect, whereas Boschini protests that he does not pretend to a foreign idiom, but to speak like the Venetian people. From this undistinguishing kind of nationality arises his malevolence against Vasari, and the methods of the foreign schools, as well as his exaggerated praise of the Venetian artists, whom he prefers, as we learn from his title page, to all the painters in the world, not merely as respects their manner of colouring, but in point of invention and design. What is worse, he makes no distinction between the fine old painters and the mannerists of his own times, and speaks as if the masters of the former age were still flourishing, and teaching in their schools, or as if the modern possessed the same powers and the same reputation; a gross equivocation into which the tiresome Compare, or gossip, is continually falling, and which his credulous Excellency as frequently commends.
If, however, in treating of Vasari, I in some measure excused his partialities, in consideration of the prejudices acquired by his education, which are afterwards with difficulty eradicated; I ought to make use of the same liberality in regard to Boschini, more especially as he possessed fewer opportunities of ridding himself of them, never having visited Rome or Florence, and giving his opinions upon foreign schools, from the hearsay relations of others. It is true that he cites in favour of the Venetians the opinion of many distinguished men; as that of Velasco, who protested to Salvator Rosa, that Raffaello was no longer a favourite with him after having seen Venice; or that of Rubens, who, after spending upwards of six years at Rome to little purpose, formed his style on the models of Titian. Albano likewise regretted that he had not commenced his studies in Venice, preferably to Rome; and Pier da Cortona having seen the works of the Venetian School, cancelled some of his labours, and ornamented afresh two chambers of the Palazzo Pitti, and one in the Casa Barberini. But these authorities, which he adduces along with others, taken chiefly from artists who preferred beauty of colouring to accuracy of design, do not prove much, and might be opposed by other authorities, even of great painters, more particularly English and French, who embraced a contrary opinion. Besides, the panegyrists thus cited by him, did not commend the modern so much as the ancient Venetian painters, so as by no means to possess the weight he would attribute to them. Moreover, in the present day, when so much has been written upon Italian painting, we shall not, on investigating what is to be admired and imitated, and what to be shunned or approved in the examples of the Venetians, appeal to the vain boastings of the sixteenth century, but to the critics of our own times. Still we do not mean to deny, but that the work in question, however strangely written, contains many valuable historical notices, and many pictorial precepts, particularly useful to such as cannot aspire to any thing beyond the character of mere naturalists, incapable of drawing a stroke that does not appear in their model, and content with portraying the dimensions of any kind of head or body, provided they be of the human shape, inventing with infinite difficulty, slow in resolving, and quite incapable of forming a grand history, more especially of battles, of flights, in short of any objects they never saw. This sect, which at that period boasted many followers, and which is not even yet extinct, is there ridiculed in a vein it is impossible to surpass, and would that the party proceeding to the opposite extreme of mannerism, at that time triumphant in Venice, had not met with equal applause! But how difficult is it to observe the golden mean! though the artists of Bologna will point out the way in due time. At present we must return to those of Venice.
Numerous other artists very nearly approached the style of Palma. Boschini enumerates six, whose manner so extremely resembles him, as to impose upon those who have not tact enough to detect the peculiar characteristics of each; (and in Palma there is a mixture of the Roman and Venetian,) consisting of the names of Corona, Vicentino, Peranda, Aliense, Malombra, and Pilotto. The same author extols them as illustrious painters; and truly, besides the splendour of their colouring, they composed upon a magnificent scale, emulating, for the most part, the fire and the striking contrasts that produced such an impression after the time of Titian, executing pictures every way deserving of a place in good collections.
Leonardo Corona, of Murano, who, from a copyist, succeeded in becoming a painter, was the rival of Palma, and nevertheless enjoyed the patronage of Vittoria; whether to keep alive the emulation of the former, or for some other reason, is uncertain. He sometimes prepared models in clay, to discover the best distributions of his chiaroscuro. By aid of these he painted his Annunciation, at SS. Giovanni and Paolo, a work very highly commended, as well as his picture at San Stefano, displaying a grandeur that arrests the eye, and reminds us more of Titian than any other model. In general, however, Corona exhibited more of Tintoretto, if not in his colouring, which in the present day appears to more advantage, at least in many other points. He produced a crucifixion so much in this artist's style, that Ridolfi has defended him with the utmost difficulty from the charge of theft. He availed himself likewise of the engravings of Flemish artists, particularly in the composition of his landscape. He did not long flourish; but left an excellent imitator of his style in Baldassare d'Anna, an artist of Flemish origin, who completed a few of his master's pieces. He also produced some original pieces for the Servi and other churches, which, though inferior to those of Corona in the selection of forms, yet surpass them in the softness, and sometimes in the force of their chiaroscuro.
Andrea Vicentino was, according to some writers, a Venetian, and pupil to Palma; not excelling in point of taste, he was nevertheless very skilful in the handling of his colours, and shewed great power of invention. Being employed in many labours, both within and without the boundaries of Venice, and even in depicting histories of the Republic, which still continue to adorn several halls in the Palazzo Grande, he was one of the most popular artists of his time. He rarely fails to exhibit in his works some perspective, or some figure borrowed, according to the custom of the plagiarists, from the best masters: including even Bassano, an artist of few ideas constantly repeated, and so far less easily pillaged with impunity. At the same time he bestows upon his plagiarisms a beauty of composition, and a general effect that does honour to his talents, applicable to every variety of subject. He could also employ a very delicate, tasteful, and effective pencil, when he chose to exert himself. In his grounds, however, he must have been less successful, many of his paintings being already much defaced. In collections, always more favourable to their duration than public places, we may find several in good preservation, and deserving of much commendation, as we gather from his Solomon Anointed on becoming king of Israel, preserved in the Royal Gallery at Florence. Marco Vicentino, son of Andrea, also acquired some celebrity by his imitations, and more by the name of his father.
Santo Peranda, a scholar of Corona and of Palma, and tolerably well versed in Roman design, having passed some time at Rome, aimed at a diversity of styles. His usual manner a good deal resembles that of Palma, while, in his large histories, which he produced at Venice and at Mirandola, he appears in a more poetical character of his own. Yet he was naturally of a more slow and reflective turn, and more studious of art, qualities that in the decline of age led him to adopt a very delicate and laboured manner. He was not ambitious of equalling his contemporaries in the abundance of his works; his aim was to surpass them in correctness; nor did he any where succeed better in his object than in his Christ taken from the Cross, painted for the church of San Procolo. Among his disciples, Matteo Ponzone, from Dalmatia, more particularly distinguished himself, assisting Peranda in his great works executed at Mirandola. In progress of time he formed an original style, which surpasses in softness that of his master, though not equal to it in point of elegance. He was fond of copying from the life, without attempting much to add to its dignity. His scholar, Gio. Carboncino, pursued his studies at Rome also, where we do not, however, find mention of him,[[77]] owing probably to his speedy return to Venice. Among the few pieces produced by him for churches, there is a Bto. Angelo, at the Carmini, which has been much commended by Melchiori, and a San Antonio, at La Pietà, mentioned by Guarienti. Two others, named Maffei, of Vicenza, and Zanimberti, of Brescia, will come under consideration in their respective states.
Antonio Vassilacchi, called Aliense, a native of the island of Milo, inherited from the line climate of Greece a genius adapted to confer honour upon the arts, and particularly on works of a vast and imaginative character. Paul Veronese, struck with his first efforts, banished him, with a feeling of jealousy, from his studio, advising him at the same time to confine himself to small pictures. Aliense observing Paul engaged in reviving the examples of Titian, renewed as far as lay in his power those of Tintoretto. He studied casts taken from the antique, designing from them both day and night; he exercised himself in acquiring a knowledge of the human frame, modelled in wax, copied Tintoretto with the utmost assiduity, and, as if wholly to forget what he had learnt from Paul, he sold the designs made at his school. Yet he could not so far divest himself of them, but that in his earliest productions, remaining at the church of Le Vergini, he displayed the manner of Paul. He has been accused by historians of having abandoned this style for one less adapted to his genius; and moreover of having been misled by the innovations of the mannerists. Sometimes, however, he painted with extreme care, as in his Epiphany, for the Council of Ten, though in general he abused the facility of his genius, without fear of risking his credit, inasmuch as his rivals Palma and Corona pursued the same plan. In order better to oppose his great enemy Vittoria, he attached himself to another architect, who possessed much influence, named Girolamo Campagna, the disciple of Sansovino; and he moreover enjoyed the favour of Tintoretto. In this manner Aliense obtained many commissions, both for the public palace and the Venetian churches, besides being engaged in many works for other cities, more especially for Perugia, at S. Pietro, all upon a magnificent scale; yet without acquiring that degree of estimation which the felicity of his genius deserved. He was assisted by Tommaso Dolobella, of Belluno, a good practitioner, and well received in Poland, where he long continued in the service of Sigismond III. In his Life of Aliense, Ridolfi makes mention also of Pietro Mera, a Fleming, whose portrait Aliense painted, as being his friend; but neither from history, nor from his own style, can we gather that he was Aliense's disciple. He resided, and employed himself much in Venice, at SS. Giovanni and Paolo, at La Madonna dell' Orto, and elsewhere: while the judgment pronounced upon him by Zanetti is, that he appeared to have greatly attached himself to the Venetian artists, and to have derived sufficient profit.
Pietro Malombra, a Venetian by birth, deserves almost to be excluded from the list of Palma's disciples, and even from that of the mannerists. If he sometimes deviated from the right path, it must rather be attributed to human error, than to erroneous maxims. Born in a degree of comparative ease, he acquired from education a sense of the value of that excellent axiom, "that honour is better than gain." After employing himself in the studio of Salviati, where he obtained a good knowledge of design, he continued to paint for his own pleasure. But equally intelligent and docile, he never scrupled to bestow the utmost pains to bring his works to a higher degree of perfection, than was the usual practice of his times. Afterwards experiencing a reverse of fortune, he entered upon the art as his profession, and ornamented parts of the Ducal Palace. In his portraits and pictures upon a small scale, he was also very successful. He represented at San Francesco di Paola, various miracles of the saint, in four pictures; and his figures display a precision in their contours, a grace, and an originality which lead us to doubt whether they can belong, not merely to the epoch, but to the school of which we are here treating. Similar specimens he produced for galleries, sometimes enlivening with them his perspective views, in which he possessed equal skill and assiduity. Those in which he exhibited the grand piazza, or the great hall of council, representing in them their respective sacred or civil ceremonies, processions, ingresses, public audiences, great spectacles, to which the place adds an air of grandeur, extorted the plaudits of all ranks.
Girolamo Pilotto occupies the sixth place among those, who, in the opinion of Boschini, are apt to be confounded with Palma. Zanetti is content with observing, that he was a true follower of that style, and that in his works may be recognized the ideas of his master, conducted in a very happy manner. Venice boasts few of his pieces, although we are elsewhere informed that he died at an advanced age. His picture of the Nuptials of the Sea, painted for the public palace, is extolled in high terms by Orlandi, while others have greatly admired his San Biagio, which he produced for the great altar of the Fraglia, in Rovigo; a picture displaying great sweetness of manner, and signed with his name.
To attempt a full list of the rest of the mannerists, who followed more or less the composition of Palma, would only weary the reader with a repetition of names. From these I select, therefore, merely a few of the most remarkable in Venice and its vicinity, having to make mention of others in the respective schools of terra firma. Girolamo Gamberati, a scholar of Porta, acquired the art of colouring from Palma, upon whose model he painted at Le Vergini, and other places. It is still suspected, however, that the character displayed in his pieces, must have come from the hand of Palma, whose friendship occasionally assisted him. In the Guide by Zanetti, we find mention of a Jacomo Alberelli, a disciple of Palma, who painted the Baptism of Christ at the church of the Ognisanti. There is a slight allusion to him in Ridolfi, by whom he is entitled Albarelli; and he adds, that he produced the bust for the tomb of his master, in whose service he lived during thirty-four years. Camillo Ballini is also recorded among the Palmese mannerists, whether a native of Venice or of the state is not certain. In his manner he is pleasing, though neither spirited nor vigorous; and he was likewise employed in the Ducal Palace. Boschini moreover extols Bianchi, Dimo, and Donati, all Venetians, and his own friends; but I would omit them, finding no commendations in any other work. I omit also Antonio Cecchini da Pesaro, whose age, as reported in the index, cannot be brought to agree with the period of Palma's professorship.