Of Exotic and New Styles in Venice.
If, according to the plan laid down by Pliny, and which I have hitherto observed, each several epoch ought to be deduced from one or more masters of a school, who may have given a new aspect to the art, it will be proper, in this instance, to vary my system. The epoch here nearest to us will be found to take its rise at a period when the Venetian artists, having almost wholly abandoned their national models, attached themselves some to one, and some to another foreign method, or formed out of them one of their own. Such were the times of which Signor Zanetti, in his work, observes, "there appeared in Venice as many different manners, as there were artists to practise them." This would appear to have been the state of the art towards the end of the 17th century. Those artists who followed, approaching still nearer to modern times, although various in point of style, resembled each other in a study of ideal beauty, and all agreed in copying from the modern Roman, or Bolognese Schools, with the addition, however, of their own defects. Still the old masters were not, on this account, underrated; but were rather spoken of as the ancients who flourished at a golden period, whose customs are to be admired, indeed, but not imitated. Fashion, as it sometimes happens also in sciences, had usurped the seat of reason; while the artists who followed in her train alleged in excuse, that the age was fond of such novelties, and that it was incumbent upon them to second its inclination, in justice to their own fortunes. Amidst these changes, the Venetian School, which had always preserved its ascendency in point of colouring, then began to alter, losing the truth of nature, as it became more brilliant. Thus few artists flourished at that period who might not, more or less, be termed mannerists in colouring. But in other respects the school appears to have improved, and particularly in treating its history pieces more appropriately, without the introduction of portraits, dresses, and other accessaries, ill adapted to them; a defect to which it had been more attached, and had more obstinately adhered, than any other of the schools. Yet it cannot be denied, that during this period of the decline of art throughout Italy, the Venetian School shone peculiarly conspicuous in the number of superior inventors it produced. For whilst Lower Italy aimed at nothing beyond the striking contrasts of the followers of Cortona; whilst in so many schools of Upper Italy, the imitators of the imitators of the Caracci were esteemed the great models; in Venice, and the adjacent state, various styles were seen to spring up, which, though not perfect, were at least original, and valuable in their way; if, indeed, the whole of Europe has not been deceived in its estimation of them, purchasing the pictures of the Ricci, of Tiepolo, of Canaletto, of Rotari, and of numerous other artists of the same time, at immense sums. But we must take a more particular survey of them.
The Cavalier Andrea Celesti, who died in the early part of the century, was disciple to Ponzoni, but without becoming his imitator. As an artist, he is very pleasing, fertile in noble images, flowing in his outlines, with delightful scenery, with airs, with features, and with draperies all graceful, and often resembling Paul Veronese. His style of colouring, also, was not remote from nature, equally lucid, pleasing, and soft. Owing to his fondness for the chiaroscuro, one of the chief attractions of his style, or rather, perhaps, to the imperfection of his grounds, there are few of his productions that continue to preserve their original beauty. Occasionally he seems to belong to the sect of Tenebrosi, and his middle tints have in some instances disappeared, destroying the harmony that in some of his best-conducted pictures was admirable. His distinguishing character was a happy audacity of hand, in which he is excelled by very few. He painted both history, and altarpieces for churches, a specimen of which is seen in his Probatica at the Ascension. In the public palace there is one of his histories from the Old Testament, abounding with all that masterly talent for which he was so remarkable, creating at once admiration and surprise. He produced pieces for private ornament, from profane history, with conversations, games, and rencounters, like Caravaggio's. Alberto Calvetti, an inferior artist, educated in his school, resembles him as little in talent, as, for the most part, in his style.
Antonio Zanchi da Este was an artist, also, better known in Venice for the number, than for the excellence of his works. His style is altogether distinct from that of the foregoing, and it is uncertain whether he derived it from his master Ruschi, or from some other of the sect of naturalists whom we have before described. Such, at least, appears the cast of his genius, common in its forms, sombre in its colours; but nevertheless exciting surprise, by a certain fulness and felicity of hand, by its picturesque spirit, by its effect of chiaroscuro, and by a grand general result, which imposes upon us by its power. If we examine more particularly into his manner, we shall not unfrequently discover an incorrectness of design, along with that kind of indecision, and indistinctness of outline, which is mostly the resource of weak, or, at least, of very hasty artists. He chiefly attached himself to Tintoretto, some traces of whom may be found in his style. In the college of S. Rocco, where that great master rendered his name immortal, we behold one of the best specimens of Zanchi. The subject, admirably fitted to his manner, contributed greatly to his success. He has there given a bold exhibition of the great plague that afflicted Venice in 1630, a picture filled with a concourse of the sick, the dying, and the dead, borne to one universal grave. Opposite to this grand painting there is another from the hand of Pietro Negri, his pupil, as is supposed, but more probably his rival, which represents the liberation of the city from that fatal scourge; and in it, too, we perceive the peculiar ease, and the manner of Zanchi, somewhat improved, however, and ennobled in its forms. Francesco Trevisani, another of his pupils, took up his residence at Rome, in the list of whose professors he has already been commended (tom. ii. p. 296). Gio. Bonagrazia, however, remained in the Venetian state; and acquired some reputation in his native town and province of Trevigi, more particularly for his paintings at San Vito.
Antonio Molinari belonged, likewise, to the same school, but almost wholly renounced the maxims he had acquired in it.[[87]] His style is by no means equally sustained; a case that frequently occurs to such as abandon the methods in which they have been educated, and attempt to strike into new paths. I have seen some of his pictures at Venice, and elsewhere, in fine relief, and others quite the contrary; at times, too, he appears beautiful, but cold. In the vigour of his powers, however, when he produced the works most decisive of his merits, such as his History of Oza, at the Corpus Domini, he displays a style no less solid than pleasing, and which equally satisfies the judgment and the eye. There is a study both of design and of expression, ample beauty of forms, richness of drapery, with a taste and harmony of tints not surpassed by any artist of the times.
We may mention, likewise, as distinguished by their manner, Antonio Bellucci, and Giovanni Segala, two painters who, like their masters, became addicted to the use of strong shades. Yet they possessed sufficient intelligence to derive some advantage even from a wrong direction of their powers. For the former disposed them in grand masses, yet delicate, and moreover united to pleasing colouring; while the latter made use of dark grounds, which he contrasted with very spirited lights, and with a skill that enlivens while it enchants us. Indeed, the style of both seemed adapted for great works, and both possessed genius enough to conduct them well. Segala, however, is preferred by Zanetti to his contemporary, and his picture of the Conception, executed for the college of La Carità, is particularly extolled by him, and, in truth, he there competes with, if he does not surpass, some of the first painters of the age. We ought to estimate the merit of Bellucci from those specimens he conducted with most care, and upon the best grounds, such as his scripture piece in the church of the Spirito Santo. He appears to most advantage, perhaps, in small figures, many of which he inserted in the landscapes of the celebrated Tempesta. When at Vienna, he became court painter to Joseph I. and to Charles VI.; and subsequently to other German princes, which he chiefly owed to this kind of talent.[[88]]
To this epoch, also, belongs the name of Gio. Antonio Fumiani, who acquired from the Bolognese School, in which he was educated, an excellent taste, both in composition and design. And from the works of Paul, which he studied with assiduity, he obtained a knowledge of architectural and other ornaments. Some have considered him deficient in warmth of tints, and in a just counterpoise of lights and shades, to which I should add, also in expression; appearing, as he does to me, cold in all his attitudes, even beyond the custom of this school. Perhaps his Dispute of Jesus with the Doctors, at the church of La Carità, is his finest work. Bencovich, having resided at Bologna, will be enumerated among the followers of Cignani.
Nearly contemporary with Fumiani, though he flourished longer and painted more, was the Cav. Niccolo Bambini, a pupil of Mazzoni, in Venice, and afterwards of Maratta, at Rome. There he became accomplished in design, exact and elegant, and capable of sustaining those noble conceptions derived from nature, which he developed in very enlarged works, both of oil and fresco. Fortunate, indeed, had he succeeded as well in his colouring; in which branch he was so sensible of his own mediocrity, as to forbid his scholars practising the art from his pictures. His taste is sometimes wholly Roman, as in his altarpiece at San Stefano, executed soon after his return from Rome. At other times, he has a more flowing manner, like that of Liberi, which he imitated for several years with success, ever afterwards retaining the beauty of his heads, especially in his women. Again he occasionally soars above himself, and in such works as he himself conceived and executed, and which were afterwards re-touched and animated, as it were, by Cassana, the Genoese, he shines as a great portrait painter, and a very powerful colourist. In the Guida of Zanetti, we meet with the names of Giovanni and Stefano Bambini, two of his sons, and most probably his pupils, though from the same, and from another more extensive work, where he makes no mention of them, we can gather that they were held in very small esteem. Girolamo Brusaferro, and Gaetano Zompini were also his pupils, and ambitious, as well, of imitating Ricci, forming a kind of mixed style not altogether destitute of originality. The second of these received honourable commissions from the court of Spain, in which he displayed a rich fund of imagination, and, in some measure, distinguished himself by his engravings.
Gregorio Lazzarini was pupil to Rosa, and not only freed himself from the sombre sect, but rising into great reputation, wholly banished it from the Venetian School, of which, for accuracy of design, he might be pronounced to be the Raffaello. Whoever contemplates the pictures of Lazzarini would, at first, suppose he must have received his education at Bologna, or rather, perhaps, at Rome. Yet he never left Venice, and by the strength of his genius alone, acquired the esteem of the most learned professors in the art, and particularly of Maratta, a very scrupulous panegyrist of his contemporaries. Thus the Venetian ambassador at Rome, having occasion to apply to him for a picture, intended to ornament the hall of the Scrutinio, he declined the commission, expressing his surprise that it should be deemed requisite to apply to him at Rome, while they had Lazzarini at Venice. And the latter artist produced a piece which justified the judgment of Maratta, representing in the noblest manner the triumphal memory of Morosini, surnamed by the Venetians, Peloponnesiaco, which adorns the forementioned hall. He most distinguished himself by his picture of San Lorenzo Giustiniani, painted for the patriarchal church; perhaps the best specimen in oil displayed by the Venetian School during this period, whether for its taste of composition, its elegance of contours, or the original beauty and variety of its countenances and its attitudes. It possesses, likewise, force of colouring, in which he was not always equally successful. In small figures he was extremely graceful, a specimen of which may be seen in a choir of Santa Caterina, at Vicenza, where he executed some very beautiful histories, in the most glowing colours imaginable. The last altarpiece, bearing his own name, was completed by his excellent pupil, Giuseppe Camerata, who in this, as well as other pieces produced for churches, pursued the same career as his master. Another of Lazzarini's pupils, however, Silvestro Manaigo, persevered in an opposite course, for though of a fine character, he was too rapid, and too much of a mannerist.
There flourished, likewise, at that period, two artists of Trevisi, Francesco, included in the list of the Roman School, and Angiolo Trevisani, who, both by birth and domicile, must be claimed for that of Venice. Fine in his inventive pieces, as we gather from those at La Carità, and various other churches in the capital, he was still more celebrated for his portraits. In exercising this branch, he formed a style founded upon nature, not, indeed, sublime, but very select, and in part conformable to the schools then in vogue. His pencil displayed diligence and research, especially in his management of the chiaroscuro.