By some, Guido Reni is esteemed the great genius of the school; nor did any other single artist excite so much jealousy in the Caracci. Lodovico was unable to disguise it; and from a pupil he made him his rival, and in order to humble him, bestowed his favour on Guercino, an artist in quite another taste. Annibal too, after some years, on seeing him at Rome, blamed Albani for inviting him thither; and, in order to depress him, he put Domenichino in opposition to him. Even from the age of twenty, when he left the school of Calvart, the Caracci discovered in him a rare genius for the art, so elevated and ambitious of distinction, that he aspired to something great and novel from the outset of his career. Some of his early efforts are to be seen in the Bonfigliuoli palace, and in other choice collections, displaying a variety of manner. He devoted much study to Albert Durer, he imitated the Caracci, studied the forms of Cesi, and, like Passerotti, aimed at giving strong relief and accuracy to the drawing of the muscles. In some instances he followed Caravaggio, and in the aforesaid palace is a figure of a sibyl, very beautiful in point of features, but greatly overlaid with depth of shade. The style he adopted arose particularly from an observation on that of Caravaggio one day incidentally made by Annibal Caracci, that to this manner there might be opposed one wholly contrary; in place of a confined and declining light, to exhibit one more full and vivid; to substitute the tender for the bold, to oppose clear outlines to his indistinct ones, and to introduce for his low and common figures those of a more select and beautiful kind.
These words made a much deeper impression on the mind of Guido than Annibal was aware of; nor was it long before he wholly applied himself to the style thus indicated to him. Sweetness was his great object; he sought it equally in design, in the touch of his pencil, and in colouring; from that time he began to make use of white lead, a colour avoided by Lodovico, and at the same time predicted the durability of his tints, such as they have proved. His fellow pupils were indignant at his presuming to depart from the Caracci's method, and returning to the feeble undecided manner of the past century. Nor did he pretend to be indifferent to their remarks and advice. He still preserved that strength of style, so much aimed at by his school, while he softened it with more than its usual delicacy; and by degrees proceeding in the same direction, he, in a few years, attained to the degree of delicacy he had proposed. For this reason I have observed that in Bologna, more than elsewhere, his first is distinguished from his second manner, and it is made a question which of the two is preferable. Nor do all agree with Malvasia, who pronounced his former the most pleasing, his latter manner the most studied.
In these variations, however, he never lost sight of that exquisite ease which so much attracts us in his works. He was more particularly attentive to the correct form of beauty, especially in his youthful heads. Here, in the opinion of Mengs, he surpassed all others, and, according to Passeri's expression, he drew faces of Paradise. In these Rome abounds more richly than Bologna itself. The Fortune in the capitol; the Aurora, belonging to the Rospigliosi; the Helen to the Spada; the Herodias to the Corsini; the Magdalen to the Barberini, with other subjects in possession of several princes, are regarded as the wonders of Guido's art. This power of beauty was, in the words of Albano, his most bitter and constant rival, the gift of nature; though the whole was the result of his own intense study of natural beauty, and of Raffaello, and of the ancient statues, medals, and cameos. He declared that the Medicean Venus and the Niobe were his most favourite models; and it is seldom we do not recognize in his paintings either Niobe herself, or one of her children, though diversified in a variety of manner with such exquisite skill, as in no way to appear borrowed. In the same way did Guido derive advantage from Raffaello, Coreggio, Parmigianino, and from his beloved Paul Veronese; from all of whom he selected innumerable beauties, but with such happy freedom of hand as to excite the envy of the Caracci. And, in truth, this artist aimed less at copying beautiful countenances, than at forming for himself a certain general and abstract idea of beauty, as we know was done by the Greeks, and this he modulated and animated in his own style. I find mention, that being interrogated by one of his pupils, in what part of heaven, in what mould existed those wondrous features which he only drew, he pointed to the casts of the antique heads just alluded to, adding, "You too may gather from such examples beauties similar to those in my pictures, if your skill be equal to the task." I find, moreover, that he took for model of one of his Magdalens, the extremely vulgar head of a colour-grinder; but under Guido's hand every defect disappeared, each part became graceful, the whole a miracle. Thus too in his naked figures he reduced them, whatever they were, to a perfect form, more especially in the hands and feet, in which he is singular, and the same in his draperies, which he often drew from the prints of Albert Durer, enriching them, freed from their dryness, with those flowing folds or that grandeur of disposition best adapted to the subject. To portraits themselves, while he preserved the forms and age of the originals, he gave a certain air of novelty and grace, such as we see in that of Sixtus V., placed in the Galli palace at Osimo, or in that wonderful one of Cardinal Spada, in possession of some of his descendants at Rome. There is no one action, position, or expression at all injurious to his figures; the passions of grief, terror, sorrow, are all combined with the expression of beauty; he turns them every way as he lists, he changes them into every attitude, always equally pleasing, and every one equally entitled to the eulogy of displaying in every action, and in every step, the beauty which secretly animates and accompanies it.[33]
What most surprises us is the variety which he infuses into this beauty, resulting no less from his richness of imagination than from his studies. Still continuing to design in the academy up to the close of his career, he practised his invention how best to vary his idea of the beautiful, so as to free it from all monotony and satiety. He was fond of depicting his countenances with upraised looks, and used to say that he had a hundred different modes of thus representing them. He displayed equal variety in his draperies, though invariably preferring to draw the folds ample, easy, natural, and with clear meaning, as to their origin, progress, and disposition. Nor did he throw less diversity into the ornaments of his youthful heads, disposing the tresses, whether loose, bound, or left in artful confusion, always different, and sometimes casting over them a veil, fillet, or turban, so as to produce some fresh display of grace. Nor were his heads of old men inferior in this respect, displaying even the inequality of the skin, the flow of the beard, with the hair turned as we see on every side, and animating the features with a few bold, decided touches, and few lights, so as to give great effect at a distance, altogether with a surprising degree of nature; specimens of which are seen at the Pitti palace, the Barberina and Albana galleries; and yet among the least rare of this artist's productions. He bestowed similar attention to varying his fleshes; in delicate subjects he made them of the purest white, adding, moreover, certain livid and azure, mixed among middle tints, open to a charge, at least by some, of mannerism.[34]
The preceding commendations, however, will not extend to the whole of Guido's works. His inequality is well known, but not owing to any maxim of his art. It arose from his love of play, a failing which obscured his many moral qualities. His profits were great; but he was kept continually in a state of indigence by his losses, which he endeavoured to repair by the too negligent practice of his art. Hence we trace occasional errors in perspective, and deficiency of invention, a defect so much insisted upon by the implacable Albani. Hence too his incorrectness of design, the disproportion of his figures, and his works put to sale before their completion. Yet these are not excluded from royal cabinets, and that of Turin possesses one of Marsyas, a finely finished figure, before which is seen standing little more than the sketch of an Apollo. To form then a fair estimate of Guido, we must turn to other efforts which raised him to high reputation. Among his most excellent pieces I am of opinion that his Crucifixion of St. Peter, at Rome, is a specimen of his boldest manner; the Miracle of the Manna at Ravenna, the Conception at Forli, the Slaughter of the Innocents at Bologna; and there too his celebrated picture of Saints Peter and Paul in the Casa Sampieri. Specimens of his more tender manner may be found in the St. Michael at Rome, the Purification at Modena, the Job at Bologna, St. Thomas the Apostle at Pesaro, the Assumption at Genoa, one of Guido's most studied pieces, and placed directly opposite the St. Ignatius of Rubens.
Guido taught at Rome, and gave his pupils, as we have stated, to that city. He educated still more for his native place, where he opened a school, frequented by more than two hundred pupils, as we are informed by Crespi. Nor are we by this number to measure the dignity of his character as a master. He was an accomplished head of his school, who, in every place, introduced into the art a more sweet and engaging manner, entitled in the times of Malvasia the modern manner. Even his rivals took advantage of it, the fact being indisputable that Domenichino, Albano, and Lanfranco, along with their best disciples, derived that degree of delicacy, in which they sometimes surpass the Caracci, from none but Guido. He would not permit the scholars in his studio to copy in the first instance from his own works, but exercised them in those of Lodovico, and the most eminent deceased masters. It is conjectured also by Crespi, that he grounded his scholars in the principles of the art of imitation, and all the first requisites, without reference to the minutiæ, which are easily acquired in the course of practice. Guido particularly prided himself on Giacomo Semenza, and Francesco Gessi, whom he thought equal to any masters at that time in Bologna. He employed them in that chapel of the cathedral at Ravenna, a perfect miracle of beauty, and gave them commissions from the court of Mantua and Savoy, assisting them also, both at Rome and his native place; in return for all which he was repaid by Semenza with gratitude, but by Gessi with bitter persecutions. He was followed by both in point of style, and specimens are to be seen in some choice collections.
Semenza emulated Guido in both his manners, and displayed more correctness, erudition, and strength. His pictures at Araceli and other places sufficiently distinguish him from the immense crowd of fresco-painters at Rome. There too are many of his altar-pieces, none more beautiful, perhaps, than the S. Sebastian, at S. Michele in Bologna. Gessi surpassed him in spirit, invention, and rapidity, for which last quality even Guido envied him. This enabled him too, from the first, to vary his works in point of manner until he hit upon the right one, as in his very beautiful St. Francis at the Nunziata, little inferior to Guido, as well as in several others conducted in his earlier and best days. To these he was indebted for his name of a second Guido; but subsequently he abused his talents, as is the case with those who are held in slight esteem for performing much and rapidly. Thus Bologna abounds with his pictures, in which, with the exception of their fine character and much delicacy, there is nothing to commend; his pictures are cold, his colouring is slight; the shape and features are often too large, and not seldom incorrect. He is known to have invariably affected the second manner of Guido, and hence he is always more feeble, dry, and less harmonious than his master. By these distinctions are the differences between salesmen and purchasers usually decided, as to whether such a piece be a poor Guido or a Gessi.
Yet Gessi had a numerous school at Bologna, on Guido's retiring, and formed scholars of some reputation, such as Giacomo Castellini, Francesco Coreggio, and Giulio Trogli, who, devoting himself to perspective, under Mitelli, and publishing a work entitled Paradossi della Prospettiva, went ever afterwards by the name of the Paradox. Ercole Ruggieri was a faithful follower of Gessi's style, insomuch as at first sight to be mistaken for his master. He was called Ercolino del Gessi, and his brother Batistino del Gessi, an artist of rare talent, commended by Baglione, and much esteemed by Cortona, in whose arms he breathed his last. Batistino was first a pupil of Domenichino, as before mentioned; and might more properly be named dello Zampieri than del Gessi, from his education and his style. He accompanied Gessi to Naples, and subsequently became his rival, and surpassed him at S. Barbaziano in Bologna. Finally he fixed his residence at Rome, where remain some of his paintings in fresco, in the cloister of the Minerva, in the Cenci palace, and elsewhere, which shew in him the promise of a very distinguished artist; but he did not survive his thirty-second year.
To Guido Reni belongs Ercole de Maria, or da S. Giovanni, called Ercolino di Guido. So pliant was his genius to that of his master, that when the latter had half completed a picture, his pupil made a copy and substituted it for the original, and Guido continued the work, unsuspicious of the cheat, as if it had been his own. He willingly employed him, therefore, in multiplying his own designs, two of which copies are yet seen in public, extremely beautiful, though not displaying the same freedom as others which he conducted on private commission, at a more advanced age. In these there appears a decision and flow of pencil which imposed upon the best judges, a talent that procured him admiration at Rome, with an honour received by no other copyist, being created a Cavalier by Urban VIII.; but this artist also died in the flower of his age.
Another good copyist and master of Guido's style appeared in Gio. Andrea Sirani. On his master's death he completed the great picture of St. Bruno, left unfinished at the Certosini, with others throughout the city in the same state. Whether owing to Guido's retouches, or want of freedom, Sirani's earliest works bear much resemblance to that master's second manner, more particularly his Crucifixion in the church of S. Marino, which seems like a repetition of the S. Lorenzo in Lucina, or that in the Modenese gallery, in whose features death itself appears beautiful. In progress of time Sirani is supposed to have aimed at the stronger style of Guido in his early career, and conducted in such taste are his pictures of the Supper of the Pharisee, at the Certosa, the Nuptials of the Virgin, at St. Giorgio, in Bologna, and the Twelve Crucifixions, in the cathedral of Piacenza, an extremely beautiful painting, ascribed by some to Elisabetta Sirani, a daughter and pupil of Gio. Andrea.