The duke was a great lover of the arts, as we gather from a selection of artists employed by him, among whom were Lionello Spada, Schedoni, Trotti, and Gio. Sons, an able figure and a better landscape painter, whom Orlandi believes to have been instructed in Parma, and perfected in the art at Antwerp. It appears, that he also had much esteem for Ribera, who painted a chapel, which is now destroyed, at Santa Maria Bianca, in so fine a style, that according to Scaramuccia, it might have been mistaken for Coreggio's, and it awakened emulation even in the breast of Lodovico Caracci.[28] The chief merit, however, of the duke, and of his brother, the cardinal, consisted in estimating and employing the genius of the Caracci. In that court they were both fairly remunerated, and held in esteem; though, owing to the arts of some courtiers, history has preserved circumstances regarding these great men, calculated to move compassion.[29] To this early patronage we may trace the events which we find in the history of the Caracci, at different periods: Annibal engaged to paint the Farnese Gallery at Rome; Agostino called to Parma, in quality of its court-painter, an office in which he died; and Lodovico sent to Piacenza, along with Camillo Procaccini, in order to decorate the cathedral of that city. Hence also arose the principles of a new style at Parma, or rather of several new styles, which during the seventeenth century continued to spread both there and throughout the state, and which were first introduced by the artists of Bologna.

Their scholars, besides Bertoia, were Giambatista Tinti, pupil to Sammachini, Giovanni Lanfranco, and Sisto Badalocchi, who, having been acquainted with the younger Caracci, at Parma, became first attached to the school of Lodovico, in Bologna, and afterwards followed Annibal to Rome, where they continued to reside with him. These, although they were educated by the Bolognese, resemble certain characters who, though they may abandon their native soil, are never able to divest themselves of its memory or its language. In respect to Lanfranco, it is agreed by all, that no artist better imitated the grandeur of Coreggio in works upon a large scale; although he is neither equal to him in colouring, nor at all approaches him in high finish, nor is destitute of an air of originality peculiar to the head of a school. At Parma, he produced a picture representing all the saints in the church that bears their name; and in Piacenza, besides his saints Alessio and Corrado at the cathedral, works highly commended by Bellori, he painted an altar-piece of St. Luke, at the Madonna di Piazza, as well as a cupola, so avowedly imitated from that of S. Giovanni at Parma, that it can scarcely escape the charge of servility. Sisto Badalocchi,[30] no way inferior to Lanfranco in point of facility, and other endowments of the art, approached very nearly to his style. It was even doubted in Parma, whether the picture of S. Quintino, in the church of that name, was the production of Lanfranco or his. Of the rest who flourished for the most part among the disciples of the Caracci, beyond the limits of their own state, we shall treat more opportunely under the Bolognese School.

Giambatista Tinti acquired the art of design and of colouring from Sammachini at Bologna; he studied Tibaldi with great assiduity, and painted upon his model at S. Maria della Scala, not without marks of plagiarism.[31] Having subsequently established himself at Parma, he selected for his chief model the works of Coreggio, and next proceeded to the study of Parmigianino. The city retains many of his productions, both in private and in public, among which that of the Assumption in the cathedral, abounding with figures, and the Catino, at the old Capuchin Nuns, are accounted some of the last grand works belonging to the old school of Parma.

From the time these artists ceased to flourish, the art invariably declined. Towards the middle of the seventeenth century we find mention, in the Guide of Parma, of Fortunato Gatti and Gio. Maria Conti, both Parmese, who were shortly followed, if I mistake not, by Giulio Orlandini. They are better qualified to shew the succession of Parmese artists than of great painters. The name of one Girolamo da' Leoni, of Piacenza, is also recorded, who was employed along with Cunio, a Milanese, about the time of the Campi. At Piacenza likewise, after the middle of the century, appeared one Bartolommeo Baderna, pupil to the Cavalier Ferrante, whose works display more diligence than genius; whence Franceschini took occasion to say, that he had knocked loudly at the door of the great painters without being able to gain admission. In the mean while the court continued to promote the study of the fine arts throughout the state. It even sent a young man of talent, named Mauro Oddi, under the direction of Berettini, with a salary to Rome. He fulfilled the expectations of his patrons by his productions at the villa of Colorno, and he adorned some churches with specimens of his altar-pieces; but still he aimed more at the fame of an architect than of a painter. At the same time there was employed at court an artist named Francesco Monti, who painted likewise for churches and private collections. He was mentioned in the Venetian School, and exercised a more marked influence over the art at Parma. presenting it in Ilario Spolverini with a disciple of merit. Ilario, no less than his master, acquired reputation from his battle-pieces; and whether owing to exaggeration or to truth, it was commonly said that the soldiers of Monti threatened, and that those of Spolverini seemed to kill. He threw no less fierceness and terror into some of his assassin scenes, which are esteemed equal to his battles. He painted chiefly for the Duke Francesco, though there are some of his works on a larger scale, in oil and in fresco, placed in the cathedral, at the Certosa, and other places throughout the city and the state.

Spolverini instructed in the art Francesco Simonini, a distinguished battle-painter of that period. Orlandi says he was a scholar of Monti, and educated at Florence upon the model of Borgognone. He long resided at Venice, where, in the Sala Cappello, and in different collections, he left pictures which abound in figures, ornamented with fine architecture, and varied with every kind of skirmish and military exploits. Ilario instructed several young Parmese in the art, among whom, perhaps, were Antonio Fratacci, Clemente Ruta, and more indisputably the Ab. Giuseppe Peroni. The first under Cignani became a better copyist of his master than a painter, being called pittor pratico, a mechanical hand, by Bianconi in his Guide to Milan, where, as well as in Bologna, a few of his pictures are to be seen. At Parma he was not employed in public, as far as I can learn, but for collections, in which he holds a pretty high rank. Ruta was likewise educated in the academy of Cignani at Bologna. Returning to his native state, whose paintings he has described, he there entered into the service of the Infant Charles of Bourbon, as long as he remained at Parma, after which he accompanied his patron to Naples. Subsequently returning to Parma; he continued to employ himself with credit, until, near the period of his decease, he lost the use of his eyes.

The Ab. Peroni, in the first instance, repaired to Bologna, where he received the instructions of Torelli, of Creti and of Ercole Lelli. He next visited Rome, where he became pupil to Masucci; though it is probable that he was struck with the colouring of Conca and Giacquinto, who were then much in vogue, as his tints partake more or less of their verds, and other false use of colouring. For the rest he could design well, and in elegant subjects partakes much of Maratta, as we perceive from his S. Philip in S. Satiro at Milan, and from the Conception, in possession of the Padri dell' Oratorio, at Turin. In Parma his productions are to be seen at S. Antonio Abbate, where his frescos appear to advantage, and there is an altar-piece of Christ Crucified, placed in competition with Battoni and Cignaroli, and here more than elsewhere he is entitled to rank among the good painters of this last age. He adorned his native place and its academy with his pictures, and died there at an advanced age. The career of Pietro Ferrari was much shorter, although he had time to produce several fine pictures for the public, besides that of his B. da Corleone in the church of the Capuchins, as well as more for private collections. He imitated the ancient manner of his school, no less than more recent styles.[32]

In Piacenza there flourished Pier Antonio Avanzini, educated by Franceschini at Bologna. He is said to have been wanting in imagination, which led him, for the most part, to copy from his master's designs. Gio. Batista Tagliasacchi, from Borgo S. Donnino, sprung from the school of Giuseppe del Sole, and displayed a fine genius for elegant subjects, which induced him to study Coreggio, Parmigianino, and Guido. He was particularly ambitious of adding Raffaello to the list, but his parents would not permit him to visit Rome. He resided and employed himself chiefly at Piacenza, where there is a Holy Family much admired in the cathedral, which, in its ideal cast of features, partakes of the Roman style, and is not inferior to the Lombards in point of colouring. He was an artist, if I mistake not, of far greater merit than fortune.

Finally, the state was never in want of excellent masters in minor branches of the art. Fabrizio Parmigiano is commended by Baglioni amongst the landscape painters of his age. He was assisted by his wife Ippolita in drawing for Italian collections, and he visited a variety of places previous to his arrival at Rome, where he also adorned a few of the churches with his wood-scenes, and views, with hermits, &c. and died there at an early age. His style was, perhaps, more ideal than true, as it prevailed before the time of the Caracci; but it was spirited and diligent. There is known also one Gialdisi, of Parma, whom, from his residence in Cremona, Zaist enumerates among the professors of that school as a celebrated painter of flowers. He frequently represented them upon small tables covered with tapestry, and he added also musical instruments, books, and playing-cards, the whole depicted with an air of truth and a fine colouring, that obtained for him from such inconsiderable objects a large portion of fame. I must also record Felice Boselli of Piacenza, who became, under the direction of the Nuvoloni, a tolerable artist in figures, though he succeeded best in copying ancient pictures, even so as to deceive the eye of experienced judges by the exactness of his imitations. Following the bent of his genius, he began to draw animals, sometimes with their skins, and at others, as they are exposed to view in the shambles; besides collections of birds and fishes, arranging them in order, and all coloured from the life. The palaces in Piacenza abound with them, Boselli, having survived beyond his eightieth year, and despatching them with facility and mechanically, whence all his productions are not equally entitled to esteem. Gianpaolo Pannini belonged to the Roman School, in which he both learned and taught, and in treating of which I rendered him that justice which the public admiration of his perspective views, and of his peculiar grace in small figures, seemed to require. Many fine specimens were sent from Rome to his native country, and among these the Signori della Missione possess a very rare picture, inasmuch as the figures are on a larger scale than those which he in general drew. It represents the Money Changers driven out of the Temple by our Lord; the architecture is truly magnificent, and the figures full of spirit and variety. The governor, Count Carasi, the able illustrator of the public paintings in Piacenza, declared that he was the only artist then deceased, of whom the city could justly boast. Such deficiency ought not to be ascribed to its climate, abounding as it does with genius, but to the want of a local school, a want, however, which was converted into a source of great utility to the city. If we examine the catalogue of painters who flourished there, with which the Count Carasi closes his work, we shall find that, with the exception of the capitals, no other city of Italy was so rich in excellent painters belonging to every school. Had it possessed masters, they would have produced for every excellent disciple, at least twenty of only middling talent, whose works would have filled its palaces and churches, as it has happened to so many other secondary cities.

Like one university for letters, one academy for the fine arts is usually found sufficient for a single state; and in particular, where it is established, supported, and encouraged in the manner of that at Parma. It owed its origin to Don Philip of Bourbon, in 1757, the tenth year of his government; and his son, who at this time bears sway, continues to promote the interests of the institution.[33] Nothing can be better calculated to revive among us the noble genius of the art of painting, than the method there adopted in the distribution of premiums. The subject of the painting being proposed, the young artists invited to the competition are not confined to those of the state; and consequently the industry of the most able and best matured students is laid under contribution, in every place, for the service of Parma. The method of holding the assembly, the skill and integrity of the umpires, and the whole form of the decision, excludes every doubt or suspicion respecting the superiority of the piece adjudged. The artist is largely remunerated; but his highest ambition is gratified in having been pronounced the first among so many competitors, and before such an assemblage. This is of itself always sufficient to raise the successful candidate above the common standard, and often leads to fortune. The prize painting assumes its perpetual station in one of the academic halls, along with the favourite pieces of previous years, forming a series which already excites a warm interest among the lovers of the fine arts. Since the period when the Cortona manner began[] to lose ground in Italy, a manner that, under such a variety of names and sects, had usurped so wide a sway, the art in our own times has approached a sort of crisis, which as yet forms an essay of new styles, rather than any prevailing one characteristic of this new era. It is in such a collection, better than in any book, that we may study the state of our existing schools; what maxims are now enforced; what kind of imitation, and with how much freedom, is allowed; from what source we are to look for a chance of recovering the ancient art of colouring; what profit painting has derived from the copies of the best pictures published in engravings, and from the precepts of the masters communicated through the medium of prints. I am aware that a variety of opinion is entertained on this head, nor would my own, were I to interpose it, give weight to any of the conflicting arguments in this matter. But I am happy to say, that finding at length appeals made to reason, which were formerly referred to practice, I feel inclined rather to indulge hopes than doubt or diffidence in regard to the future.

[28] See Lettere Pittoriche, tom. i. p. 211.