Of these the first is the least known, consisting of abundance of strong shades, with sufficiently animated lights, less studied in the features and in the extremities, with fleshes inclining to the yellow; in the rest less attractive in point of colouring; a manner distantly resembling that of Caravaggio, in which kind are to be found several specimens both at Cento and in S. Guglielmo a' ministri degl'Infermi at Bologna. From this he passed to his second manner, which is by far the most pleasing and valuable. He continued to improve it during several years, with the aid of other schools; in this interval often visiting Bologna, residing for some time at Venice, and remaining many years at Rome along with the most eminent followers of Caracci, and entering into terms of friendship with Caravaggio. His taste is mainly founded on the style of this last master; displaying strong contrast of light and shadow; both exceedingly bold, yet mingled with much sweetness and harmony, and with powerful art of relief, a branch so greatly admired by professors.[39] Hence some foreigners have bestowed on him the title of the magician of Italian painting; for in him were renewed those celebrated illusions of antiquity, such as that of the boy who stretched forth his hand to snatch the painted fruit. From Caravaggio too he borrowed the custom of obscuring his outlines, and availed himself of it for despatch. He also imitated his half-sized figures upon one ground, and for the most part composed his historical pictures in this method. Yet he studied to become more correct in point of design, and more select than Caravaggio; not that he ever attained peculiar elegance or peculiar dignity of features, though most frequently he drew his heads, like a sound observer of nature, with graceful turns, easy natural attitudes, and a colouring, which if not the most delicate, is at least the most sound and most juicy. Often in comparing the figures of Guido with Guercino's, one would say that the former had been fed with roses, as observed by one of the ancients, and the latter with flesh. How far he excelled as a colourist in his draperies, formed in the taste of the best Venetians, in his landscape, and in his accessories, will sufficiently appear on beholding his S. Petronilla in the Quirinal, or his picture of Christ risen from the Dead, at Cento,[40] or his St. Helen, at the Mendicants in Venice; excellent specimens of his second manner. To the same belong in general all that he left at Rome, even his greater works, such as the S. Gio. Grisogono in the soffitto of that church, or the Aurora, adorning the villa Lodovisi. Yet he surpassed even these, to the surprise of all, in the cupola of the Piacenza cathedral; and in the same city he appears to have competed with Pordenone, and in point of vigour of style to have gone beyond him.
Some years having elapsed, after his return from Rome to Cento, he began to emulate Guido, perceiving that his sweetness of manner obtained such distinguished applause. By degrees he softened down that power of hand just noticed, and painted more open and vividly. He added somewhat more attraction and variety to his heads, and a certain study of expression, almost indescribable, which is surprising in some of his pictures of this period. Some have assigned such a change of manner to the time of Guido's decease, when Guercino, perceiving that he could take the lead at Bologna, left Cento, in order to fix his residence in that great city. But several pictures which he had conducted in his third manner, previous to Reni's death, fully confute such an opinion. On the contrary, it was rumoured that Guido remarked this change, which he construed into commendation of himself, declaring that he had avoided Guercino's style as much as possible, whilst the latter approached as nearly as he could to Guido's. In this taste, though partaking of the preceding, is the Circumcision of Jesus, placed in the church of Gesù e Maria, in which the study of architecture and drapery vies with that of the figures; and it is difficult to decide whether these most please by their form, or by their expression. We might add the Nuptials of the Virgin, at S. Paterniano in Fano, the S. Palazia in Ancona, the Nunziata at Forli, the Prodigal Son in the royal palace at Turin, a history piece of entire figures, which is met with in half figures in many galleries. However attractive this last manner may be found, skilled judges would have wished Guercino not to have swerved from the vigour of the second, to which his genius was moulded, and in which he shone unrivalled and unique.
The frequency of his commissions contributed, perhaps, to put him upon a more easy method, no less than his own incredible genius for execution and despatch. He produced a hundred and six altar-pieces, and a hundred and forty-four large pictures for princes and other persons of distinction, without including numbers of others painted for private persons, Madonnas, portraits, half-length figures, and landscapes, in which the rapidity of execution is highly original. Hence he is by no means rare in collections. The noble Zolli family at Rimino possesses about twenty of his pieces, Count Lecchi at Brescia also a great number; all perfect and polished according to his manner. Among these is a portrait of a friar of the Osservanti, his father confessor, quite a miracle of art.
Guercino's school greatly flourished at Cento, in Bologna not so much, owing to his own choice of having his two nephews the Gennari, and a few other intimate friends with him, which led him to exclude strangers in some degree from his studio. Few Bolognese artists, therefore, belong to this master; such as Giulio Coralli, whom Orlandi, a contemporary writer, gives as pupil to Guercino at Bologna, and of Cairo at Milan, and who, Crespi adds, was much employed at Parma, at Piacenza, and at Mantua. He was a better portrait-painter, if I mistake not, than a composer. Fulgenzio Mondini was an artist of more merit; he painted two fresco histories in the church of S. Petronio at Bologna, relating to the Paduan saint. He died young at Florence, where, after having painted some time for the court, he was employed by the Marchesi Capponi to decorate their villa of Colonnata, and his memory has been honoured with a long eulogy by Malvasia. The latter declares that he knew none gifted with qualities that promised so much in that age, and conjectures that had he survived he would have become the first fresco painter of his age.
The two young Gennari were sons of Gio. Francesco's sister, and of Ercole, son of Benedetto Gennari. Respecting Ercole, it is stated that no more exact copyist of the works of Guercino was to be met with. His sons, Benedetto and Cesare, likewise distinguished themselves in copying the original compositions of their uncle, and the numerous repetitions of Guercino's sibyls, of his pictures of St. John, of his Herodiads, and similar pieces, are ascribed more particularly to them. They may all be recognized, however, by a more feeble tone in their tints; and I once saw in the Ercolani palace a Bathsheba of Guercino, along with a copy by one of the Gennari. The former appeared as if newly painted at the time, the latter as if many years previously, such was its inferiority in strength of hand. The two brothers were employed in Cento, in Bologna, and in other cities of Italy; while Benedetto, the ablest of them, was engaged also in England, as court-painter under two reigns. Both would seem to have inherited the style along with the fortune of Gio. Francesco, and, I may also add, his studies; because in the manner of sectaries, they made repeated copies of the heads of his old men, women, and boys, which he himself was in the habit of repeating on his canvass too frequently. There is a S. Leopardo by Benedetto in the cathedral at Osimo, and a S. Zaccaria at the Filippini in Forli, which might have been mistaken for the uncle's, had the nephew displayed somewhat more strength and power of relief. In the same way Cesare, in a Mary Magdalen of the Pazzi, at S. Martino in Bologna, and in other pieces, has succeeded in giving the features better than the spirit of Barbieri. It ought to be observed that Cesare preserved his first manner to the close of his life, and that he was assiduous in teaching at Bologna, where his school was frequented also by foreigners, among whom Simon Gionima distinguished himself as a follower of Guercino, and was well received at Vienna. Benedetto subsequently formed for himself a style in England, both more polished and careful, and exemplified it more particularly in his portraits, which he conducted there for Charles II. and the royal family. On the expulsion of that family he returned to Italy, almost transformed into a Dutch or Flemish painter, such was the truth with which he imitated velvets, lawns, lace, gems, and other ornaments in gold, indeed all that can enrich a portrait, besides drawing it extremely like, and artfully freed from any blemishes in the original. By means of this taste, new in Italy, Benedetto obtained much applause and much employment in portrait, both from princes and individuals. We may here add a Bartolommeo Gennari, brother to Ercole, who resembles Guercino less than any of the three preceding, though extremely natural and spirited. He has a picture of St. Thomas at the Rosario di Cento, in the act of putting his hand to our Saviour's side, and the admiration both of him and the other apostles is very finely expressed. The pupil, and probably the relation of Guercino, was one Lorenzo Gennari di Rimini, at which place is one of his pictures at the Capuccini, very fairly executed.
Francesco Nagli, surnamed, from his country, Centino, was much employed at the Angeli and in other churches at Rimini. He was an excellent imitator of Barbieri, in point of colouring and chiaroscuro; in the rest somewhat dry in design, cold in his attitudes, and no way novel in his ideas. To the same district belonged Stefano Ficatelli, a painter of good invention, who decorated several churches of Ferrara; but more especially an excellent copyist of Guercino, not inferior in this respect to Francesco Bassi, of Bologna, so highly commended by Crespi. Among Guercino's copyists, Gio. Francesco Mutii, or Mucci, of Cento, son of a sister of Guercino, distinguished also as an engraver, held a high rank. Stefano Provenzali, likewise from Cento, and a pupil of Barbieri, applied his talents to battle-pieces, much extolled by Crespi, from whose MSS. I have borrowed several of my notices of the Centese artists.
Two of these, followers of Guercino, are mentioned by Malvasia. They are Cristoforo Serra, a faithful and excellent imitator of Gio. Francesco, and preceptor of Cristoforo Savolini, who has a fine picture of the saint at S. Colomba in Rimini; and Cesare Pronti, an Augustine, born at Rimini, if we give credit to the author of its city guide, and called da Ravenna, on account of his long residence at that place. Both the above cities exhibit his altar-pieces, much extolled, and some chiaroscuri[TN7] happily enough disposed; in particular those histories of St. Jerome painted in the Confraternity of his name at Rimini, with abundant grace and spirit. In Pesaro, also, he exhibited in the church of his order a St. Thomas da Villanova, with beautiful specimens of architecture, and in a more original taste than the two Gennari. The life of this able ecclesiastic has been written by Pascoli, who knew him, insomuch that we may give him credit when he declares that he was born at the Cattolica, of the family of the Baciocchi, afterwards assuming the name of Pronti, the maiden name of his mother. He gives other anecdotes of him; and what is more interesting is the account of his first passion for the art, on contemplating, when a boy, a collection of fine pictures in a shop at the fair of Sinigaglia. He gazed upon them during several hours, unmindful of his meals, and of his parents, who were in search of him through the city, and who on finding him could with difficulty tear him from the spot. They were unable, however, to destroy the fixed determination of his soul to become a painter; the impression was indelible, and he set out for Bologna. There he first entered the school of Barbieri; and afterwards, as we have already remarked, the cloister. Respecting different scholars of Guercino, such as were Preti, Ghezzi, and Triva, it is unnecessary here to repeat what has already been stated in several other schools.
Gio. Lanfranco, one of those distinguished disciples of the Caracci who followed Annibal to Rome, was born at Parma. He was early employed by the Conti Scotti in Piacenza, where, for mere pastime, drawing some figures in charcoal upon a wall, his rare genius shone forth, and was assigned to the cultivation of Agostino Caracci. Frequent mention of him is made in the course of this work. At Parma the reader finds him a pupil to Agostino, and on his death under the care of Lodovico, after which he pursued his studies under Annibal at Rome. Both there and in Naples we have seen him celebrated as a professor and preceptor in both schools. The character of his genius was sought, conceitedly perhaps, but still with truth, by Bellori, in his name; and doubtless it would be difficult to find an artist more bold and striking, alike in conception and in execution. He had formed a peculiar manner, which both in design and expression partakes of the Caracci's, while the composition is drawn from Coreggio. It is a manner at once easy, and elevated by the dignity of the countenances and actions, by the ample and well disposed masses of light and shade, by the nobleness of the drapery and its imposing folds, broad and wholly novel in the art. For this precise reason its grandeur is without that last finish which adds to the worth of other artists, but would in him diminish it. In such a style he was enabled to be less exact without displeasing us, possessing so many admirable qualities, rare conceptions, colours wonderfully harmonized, if not animated; very beautiful foreshortening; contrasts of parts and figures, which have served as models, as is observed by Mengs, for the tasteful style of the moderns.
He adopted this style in a number of pictures for private ornament, both for the Dukes Farnesi, in whose palace at Rome he first began to paint, and for other noblemen. His Polyphemus, conducted for the Casa Borghese in that city, is highly extolled, as well as his scriptural histories at S. Callisto. There are many pictures also from his hand; his St. Andrea Avellino at Rome, enriched with splendid architecture, boasts singular merit; his Dead Christ at Foligno, with the "Padre Eterno," a figure, which though in human form, nevertheless impresses us with grand ideas of the Divine Being; the Transit of our Lady, in Macerata; the S. Rocco, and the S. Corrado, in Piacenza; perhaps the most finished among Lanfranco's productions, and deservedly the most celebrated. But he exhibited this style still more fully in cupolas and other scenes on a grand scale, according to Coreggio's example. When young, he executed a small coloured model of the cupola of the cathedral at Parma, emulating his whole style, in particular that grace of motion, of all by far the most difficult. He imitated it too at S. Andrea della Valle at Rome, and in his picture availed himself of the example afforded by Michelangiolo in architecture, when unable to execute a more beautiful cupola than Brunelleschi's, and desirous of differing from it, he worked from a new design, and succeeded to admiration. This production forms an epoch in the art, inasmuch "as he was the first," says Passeri, "to irradiate the opening of a celestial glory with a splendour of light, of which there was formerly seen no example." ... "Lanfranco's cupola remains a solitary specimen in the way of glories; because, in respect to its celestial idea, in the opinion of the most dispassionate judges, he has attained the highest degree, as well in the harmony of the whole, its chief object, as in the distribution of the colours, in the parts, and in force of chiaroscuro," &c. Nor was this, on which he spent four years, the sole example he left of a fecundity of idea and rare elevation of mind, of which we meet with no account in any other artist, even among the ancient painters. Add to this, the cupolas at the Gesù, and at the Tesoro of S. Gennaro at Naples, where he succeeded Domenichino, with various tribunes and chapels in Rome and Naples, adorned with equal majesty, and which have given to Lower Italy the most genuine examples in this kind, of which the art can boast. From him it was that the Machinists acquired the power of gratifying the eye at larger distances, painting only in part, and in part leaving the work, as he was accustomed to express it, for the air to paint. In the two schools above-mentioned we have embraced his best disciples: to the Bolognese he gave no pupils, as far as I learn, any more than to Romagna and its dependencies; if we except Gio. Francesco Mengucci, of Pesaro, who assisted him in the cupola of St. Andrea; a painter, I believe, for collections, who has been much extolled by Malvasia.
Next to the five heads of schools hitherto recorded, ought to be mentioned Sisto Badalocchi; and the more as he was Annibal's disciple, and long resided with him at Rome. He was fellow citizen, and a faithful companion too of Lanfranco, whose style he approached very nearly. Sisto designed admirably, being preferred by Annibal in this branch to any of his fellow pupils, and even, with singular modesty, to himself. Ample testimony of his ability is proclaimed in the engravings of Raffaello's loggie, executed in conjunction with Lanfranco, and dedicated to Annibal; besides the six prints of Coreggio's grand cupola, a work which, to the public regret, was left incomplete. He was also selected by his master to decorate the chapel of S. Diego, where he directed him to paint from one of his cartoons a history of that saint. In point of invention he was not equal to the leaders of his school; so that, employed in filling up the secondary parts, he assisted Guido and Domenichino at S. Gregorio; and attended Albani at the Verospi palace; although his picture of Galatea left there is worthy of the hand of a great master. He appears to advantage in competition, and mostly excels, as we may gather from the church of St. Sebastian at Rome, where he painted along with Tacconi; and at Reggio, where he rivalled some of the less distinguished artists of Bologna. Besides his other works, that city has to boast the rich cupola of S. Giovanni, on which Sisto conducted a small, but very beautiful copy of that in the cathedral at Parma. Other of his specimens are to be met with in the Modenese state, particularly in the ducal palace at Gualtieri, where he represented in one chamber the Trials of Hercules. Of his pictures at Parma the most celebrated is that of St. Francis, at the Cappuccini; a painting, both in point of figures and landscape, composed in the best taste of the Caracci. For the rest, we may add what has been said of Lanfranco, that he most frequently executed much less than he knew.