Let us briefly examine this matter. It is said that he there attempted to depreciate the works of Michelangiolo, and that after exhibiting his own productions at the Traspontina, which met with ridicule from the Roman professors, in order to escape from the hisses they excited on all sides, he was compelled to return to his native place. This story, added to others of a like nature, irritated the Lombard artists. Hence Scanelli in his Microcosm, Lamo in his Discourse on Painting, and Campi in his History, renewed the complaints of the other schools against Vasari. These are recorded by Zaist (p. 72) with the addition of his own refutation of this account. The refutation rests upon the epochs which Vasari himself points out, and which of themselves, say his opponents, afford a decided negative to the story of Boccaccino's journey to Rome in time to have cast reflections upon the paintings of Michelangiolo. It is the custom of less accurate historians, when they give the substance of a fact, to add to it circumstances of time, of place, or of manner, that had really no existence. Ancient history is full of such examples, and the severest criticism does not presume to discredit facts on the strength of some interpolated circumstance, provided there be others sufficiently strong to sanction them. In this instance, the historian, and a great friend of Michelangiolo, narrates an affair relating to that friend, and which is supposed to have taken place at Rome, only a short period before the author wrote. We can hardly then believe it to have been a mere idle report without any foundation in truth. I would reject indeed some of its accessaries, and in particular condemn those unwarranted reflections in which Vasari indulges at the expense of one of the most distinguished artists who at that time flourished in Lombardy.
Next to the four historical paintings just mentioned, follow those conducted by Romanino di Brescia and by Pordenone, two master spirits of their age, who left examples of the Venetian taste at the cathedral, which were not neglected by the Cremonese, as will be seen. We ought in justice to add, that their city has always shewn a laudable wish to preserve these ancient productions from the effects of age, as far as in her power. When towards the close of the sixteenth century they began to exhibit marks of decay, they were instantly ordered to be examined and restored by a painter and architect of some reputation, called Il Sabbioneta, his real name being Martire Pesenti. The same degree of care and attention has been shewn them in the present day by the Cav. Borroni.
Two other citizens exhibited specimens in the same place, of the style which is now called antico moderno. Alessandro Pampurini, as it is said, drew some figures of cherubs, round a cartellone, or scroll for inscriptions, together with a kind of arabesques, bearing the date of 1511; and in the subsequent year Bernardino Ricca, or Ricco, produced a similar work opposite to it, which owing to its having been executed with too much dryness, perished in a few years, and was renewed by a different hand. But there still exists his picture of a Pietà at S. Pietro del Po, with some specimens likewise by his companion, sufficient to prove that both are worthy of commemoration for their time.
Having thus described the series of artists who decorated the cathedral, there remain a few other names unconnected with that great undertaking, but which, nevertheless, enjoyed considerable celebrity in their day. Such are Galeazzo Campi, the father of the three distinguished brothers, and Tommaso Aleni. This last so nearly resembled Campi in his manner, that their pictures can with difficulty be distinguished, as may be seen at S. Domenico, where they painted in competition with each other. It is loosely conjectured by many that they were the pupils of Boccaccino, an opinion which I cannot entertain. The disciples of the best masters in the fourteenth century continued to free themselves, the longer they flourished, from the dry manner of their early education. Galeazzo, on the other hand, the only one we need here mention, approaches less closely to the modern style than his supposed master, as we perceive in the suburban church of S. Sebastiano, where he painted the tutelar saint and S. Rocco standing near the throne of the Virgin with the Infant Christ. The picture bears the date of 1518, when he was already a finished master, and nevertheless he there appears only a weak follower of the Perugino manner. His colours are good and natural, but he is feeble in chiaroscuro, dry in design, cold in his expression; his countenances have not a beam of meaning, while that of the holy infant seems as if copied from a child suffering under an obliquity of the eyes, those of the figure are so badly drawn. The observation, therefore, of Baldinucci, or of his continuator, that he "had rendered himself celebrated even beyond Italy," would seem in want of confirmation; nor do I know whence such confirmation can be derived. Certainly not from the ancients, for even his own son Antonio Campi only remarks of Galeazzo, that he was "a tolerable painter for his age."
Nor did some others of Galeazzo's contemporaries rise much above mediocrity. To this class belonged Antonio Cigognini and Francesco Casella, a few of whose productions remain in their native place; Galeazzo Pesenti, called Il Sabbioneta, a painter and sculptor; Lattanzio of Cremona, who having painted at the school of the Milanese in Venice, has been recorded by Boschini in his Miniere della Pittura, besides Niccolo da Cremona, who was employed, according to Orlandi, in 1518 at Bologna. There are two, however, who merit a larger share of consideration, having produced works of a superior character which still exist, and belong in some degree to the golden period of the art. The name of the first is Gio. Batista Zupelli, of whom the Eremitani possess a fine landscape with a Holy Family. His taste, although dry, is apt to surprise the eye by its originality, and attracts us by a natural and peculiar grace, with which all his figures are designed and animated, as well as by a certain softness and fulness of colouring. If Soiaro had not acquired the principles of his art from Coreggio, we might suppose that this Zupelli had instructed him in regard to the strong body of his colouring, which is remarkable both in him and in his school. The second is Gianfrancesco Bembo, the brother and disciple of Bonifazio, highly commended by Vasari, if, indeed, he be, as is supposed, the same Gianfrancesco, called Il Vetraro, who is recorded by the historian in his Life of Polidoro da Caravaggio. It appears certain that he must have visited Lower Italy, from the style which he displays in one of his altar-pieces, representing saints Cosma and Damiano, at the Osservanti, to which his name with the date of 1524 is affixed. I have not observed any thing in a similar taste, either in Cremona or in its vicinity. It retains very slight traces of the antique, much as may be observed in those of F. Bartolommeo della Porta, whom he greatly resembled in point of colouring, however inferior in the dignity of his figures and his draperies. A few more of his specimens are met with in public places and the houses of noblemen, which exhibit him as one of those painters who added dignity to the style of painting in Lombardy, and improved upon the ancient manner.
[34] See Zaist, p. 12.
[35] See Lomazzo, Treatise on Painting, p. 405.
[36] Chapter iii.