His son Filippo and Domenico degli Ambrogi, called Menichino del Brizio, were his most distinguished disciples. These artists painted more for private ornament than for that of the churches. The latter became celebrated for his design; was employed chiefly in friezes for chambers, in architecture, and landscape in fresco, sometimes in conjunction with Dentone and Colonna, sometimes alone. He was also a finished artist of pictures for private rooms, occasionally exhibiting there copious histories, as in that we read of in the full and well drawn up catalogue of the Sig. Canon Vianelli's pictures at Chioggia. It presents us with the entrance of a pontiff into the city of Bologna. It is not surprising that he should be acknowledged and esteemed even in the Venetian territories, having been the preceptor of Fumiani, and master of Pierantonio Cerva, who painted a good deal for the Paduan state.
Gio. Andrea Donducci, called from his father's profession Mastelletta,[41] inherited a genius for the art. Impatient, however, of the precepts of the Caracci, his masters, he neglected to ground himself in the art, was unequal to designing naked figures, and far from producing any masterpiece. His method was short, and wholly intent upon attracting the eye by effect; loading his pictures with shadow in such a way as to conceal the outlines, and opposing to his shadows masses of light sufficiently strong, thus succeeding in disguising from judges the inaccuracies of his design, and gratifying the multitude with a display of apparent novelty. I have often imagined that this artist had great influence with the sect of the Tenebrosi, which afterwards spread itself through the Venetian state, and almost every district in Lombardy. He was enabled to support his credit by a noble spirit of design, by a tolerable imitation of Parmigianino, the sole artist adapted to his disposition, and by a natural facility that enabled him to colour a very large extent of canvass in a short time. Among such specimens are the Death, and the Assumption of the Virgin, at the Grazie, and some similar histories, not unfrequent in Bologna. Perhaps his picture of S. Irene, at the Celestini, is superior to any other. When advanced in life, hearing the applause bestowed on the clear, open style, he began to practise it, but with no kind of success, not possessing ability to appear to advantage out of his own obscure manner. In his former one he had painted at S. Domenico two miracles of the saint, which were esteemed his masterpieces; but these he altered according to his new method, and they were thenceforth regarded among his most feeble performances. In his half-figures the same diversity of manner is observable; and those executed in the first, such as his Miracle of the Manna, in the Spada palace, with others at Rome, are justly held in esteem. The same may be said of his landscapes, which, in many galleries, are attributed to the Caracci; but the taste in the rapidity of touch, very original and remarkable in Mastelletta, is sufficient to distinguish them. Annibal was so well pleased with these pictures for galleries, that, having his company at Rome, he advised him to settle there and confine himself to similar labours; advice by no means pleasing to Donducci. But he a good deal frequented the studio of Tassi, and these artists mutually assisted each other, freely communicating between themselves what they knew. Soon after he returned to Bologna, and resumed his more extensive works; but met with serious disappointments, such as to induce him to enter as a friar, first among the Conventuals, next with the canons of S. Salvatore. He educated no pupils of merit, except that one Domenico Mengucci, of Pesaro, resembled Mastelletta a good deal in his landscape; an artist better known at Bologna than in his native place.
Besides the forementioned disciples of the Caracci academy, several others are entitled to consideration; such as Schedone and more names recorded in the schools already described, with a few yet left to mention in those of which we have to treat. Many names will also find a place among the Bolognese painters of landscape, or those of perspective. A few others, who devoted themselves to figures, have been scarcely alluded to by Malvasia, either because then living, or not so distinguished as some of the preceding; nevertheless they are not despicable, for to hold a second or third rank, where Domenichino and Guido are the foremost, is a degree of honour not to be regretted. One of these is Francesco Cavazzone, a writer too on the art, of whom the Canon Crespi subsequently collected very ample notices, in particular extolling a Magdalen kneeling at the feet of the Redeemer, a truly imposing picture, that ornamented the church of that saint in via S. Donato. Of much the same degree of merit was Vincenzio Ansaloni, who gave only two altar-pieces to the public, but sufficient to establish his title to the character of a great artist. Giacomo Lippi, called also Giacomone da Budrio, was another distinguished artist, of universal genius, in whose fresco histories at the portico of the Nunziata we trace the pupil of Lodovico, not very select, but of prompt and practised hand. Some pictures in fresco too by Piero Pancotto, at S. Colombano, gave rise to feelings of disgust from the ridicule attempted to be cast on his own parish priest, caricatured by him in the features of a holy evangelist, though as an artist he could not be despised.
Among the histories at S. Michele in Bosco, already described, is seen the Sepulture of the SS. Valeriano and Tiburzio by Alessandro Albini, a painter of spirit; the Giving Alms of S. Cecilia, by Tommaso Campana, who afterwards followed Guido; the St. Benedict among the Thorns, by Sebastiano Razali; the Conference between Cecilia and Valeriano, by Aurelio Bonelli; all respectable artists, except that Malvasia blames the last mentioned as unworthy of a school productive of so many noble disciples; but it is rare that in such rich abundance some abortive specimen does not appear. Florio and Gio. Batista Macchi, Enea Rossi, Giacinto Gilioli, Ippolito Ferrantini, Pier-Maria Porettano, Antonio Castellani, Antonia Pinelli;[42] all these gave to the Bolognese public some superior specimens of their skill, and more in the adjacent places; and we may add Gio. Batista Vernici, who was subsequently employed by the Duke of Urbino. Nothing remains there from the hand of Andrea Costa, or of Vincenzio Gotti; of whom the former, according to Malvasia, painted for the S. Casa of Loreto some admirable pieces, now known, if I mistake not, under another name. The latter resided in the kingdom of Naples, mostly at Reggio, an artist of singular rapidity, whose altar-pieces in that city alone amount to the number of two hundred and eighteen. Other followers of the Caracci are known to have renounced painting in favour of engraving and sculpture. The academy was closed on Lodovico's death; and the casts, with other requisites for the art, remained for a long period at Bologna. Domenico Mirandola, on the opening of Facini's academy, quitted that of Lodovico, became a celebrated sculptor, enriched himself with the spoils of both, and kept an open studio, regulated according to the method of his first masters; called for this reason by some the studio of the Caracci. Names, however, are not realities; and correctness of design was not maintained in this soi-disant academy, but gradually deteriorated; the honour of its revival being reserved for the genius of Cignani, of whom we shall say more in our fourth epoch.
The review of the Bolognese artists is here complete. In the year 1617 the state of Ravenna had to boast a Guarini, an artist of a sound style, not far removed from that of the Caracci, if we may judge from a Pietà, at S. Francesco, in Rimini, to which place he belonged. There too was one Matteo Ingoli, who is mentioned in the Venetian School, to which he wholly devoted his talents. To the same state belonged the family of Barbiani, who have continued down to this period their services to their country. Giambatista, the most ancient, is mentioned by Orlandi; his school is not known, though he possesses an attractive manner, much resembling Cesi's, but differing from him in the study of each figure, and on this account unequal with himself. His St. Andrew, and his St. Joseph, on two altars at the Francescani; his S. Agatha, in the church of that name, with other pieces in different places, are well executed in oil. In the chapel of N. Signora del Sudore, in the cathedral, is the vaulted ceiling painted by him with an Assumption of the Virgin, which, even compared with Guido's cupola at Ravenna, does not displease. A son of Gio. Batista succeeded him in his profession, not in his reputation; from whom, or some other member of the family, sprung Andrea Barbiani, who, on the corbels of the said ceiling, coloured the four evangelists, and painted several altar-pieces both at Ravenna and at Rimini. After examining his manner, and in particular his tints, I believe him to have been a pupil, or at least a disciple of P. Pronti of Rimini, shortly before commended among Guercino's disciples along with Gennari, also from that place. Here likewise we shall mention a third, sprung from the school of Padovanino, but residing in his native place; a painter more of pictures for private ornament than for churches. His name was Carlo Leoni, and he competed with Centino in his picture of the Penitence of David, at the Oratorio, and with other excellent figurists who then flourished in Romagna. Among Guercino's disciples will be found also natives of Cesena; and I am convinced that many other artists of Romagna were retained by him at Cento; a fact which is alluded to in his life, without any mention of the names.
At Faenza, in the time of the Caracci, flourished one Ferraù da Faenza, with the additional family appellation of Fanzoni, or Faenzoni, derived probably from his country. According to Titi he was pupil to Vanni, but left nothing at Rome besides his fresco paintings at the Scala Santa, at S. Gio. Laterano, and in great number at S. Maria Maggiore. They consist of scripture histories, of exact design, very pleasing tints, and good mixture of colours; mostly executed in competition with Gentileschi, Salimbeni, Novara, and Croce. From his hand is the S. Onofrio, in the cathedral at Foligno, with several pieces at Ravenna and Faenza, where however his manner seems to have changed. There I heard him included among the pupils of the Caracci, from whom perhaps he some time studied. Nor is this at all difficult to believe on contemplating the chapel of S. Carlo, in the cathedral, or his Deposition from the Cross, at the nunnery of S. Domenico; or his Probatica, at the confraternity of S. Giovanni, which is the best preserved of all his pictures in the district, and nearest resembling Lodovico's style. I am assured that his real family was the Fenzoni, of noble origin, now extinct at Faenza; and that he died in his native place in 1645, aged 83. It is related that he perpetrated an atrocious deed, having assassinated, out of mere professional jealousy, one Manzoni of Faenza, a young artist of rising reputation, as is apparent from several of his pictures, of which two are in the possession of the Ab. Strocchi, Giudice di Pace, in Faenza. Nor is he less esteemed for his altar-pieces, particularly that of the Martyrdom of S. Eutropio Vescovo, exhibited in that church. He would have shone a distinguished ornament of the art, had not his career been thus untimely cut short by envy. The assassin artist failed to restore to Painting that of which he had deprived her, even by educating his two young daughters, Teresa, who painted much for her native place, and Claudia Felice, perhaps her superior, at Bologna, where she died in 1703.
One Tommaso Misciroli left several specimens of his hand at Faenza, known generally by the name of Pittor Villano. He flourished after Ferraù,[TN8] and owed his reputation to his genius rather than to any precepts of the art. Neither in his design, his expression, nor his costume, has he any thing to recommend him, and in these he often errs. But in the vivacity of his attitudes, in his colouring, acquired from Guido, his draperies from the Venetians, he is equal to many of this school; yet this remark applies only to a few works executed with much care. The best of these is at the church of S. Cecilia, where he has exhibited the martyrdom of that saint; and in the scene is introduced an executioner stirring up the flames, a figure almost copied from the grand picture by Lionello, at the church of S. Domenico in Bologna.
Gaspero Sacchi da Imola is known to me only from some pictures he conducted at Ravenna, and recorded first by Fabbri, next by Orlandi. It is uncertain to what country the Cav. Giuseppe Diamantini belonged, called by some in mistake Giovanni; but generally acknowledged to have been a native of Romagna. In the twenty-eighth volume of the Antichità Picene it is asserted that he came from Fossombrone. He resided at Venice, and left at S. Moisè an Epiphany, in which he displays great freedom of hand, and a bold effect in the execution. He is more celebrated in collections belonging to the Venetian state than in churches, being met with at Rovigo and at Verona, where, in Casa Bevilacqua, are some heads of philosophers in a very novel manner. His character indeed consisted in this kind of painting, and he would seem to have derived his idea of them from Salvator Rosa.
We shall now proceed to treat of the landscape, flower, and perspective painters; all artists in short connected with minor branches of the art. On this subject the historians who preceded me have attributed no improvement to the Caracci, except in landscape; though I believe that their prevailing maxim of shunning all caprice and fallacy, and confining themselves to representations of truth and nature in the art, spread its influence from the human figure down to the insect, from the tree to the fruit, from the palace to the cottage. In a similar way too was introduced the maxim of avoiding in literature that affectation, prevalent in the sixteenth century, in favour of the purity of better ages; owing to which the style of writing, from that of history even to familiar correspondence, from the poetry of the epic to the sonnet, shone with real lustre.
Gio. Batista Viola and Gio. Francesco Grimaldi were the two leading painters of landscape at that period, in the manner of the Caracci. Viola was among the first to exclude from painting that hard, dry style so much practised by the Flemish. He has been mentioned as being at Rome, where he established himself, and decorated with landscape-frescos different villas belonging to those nobles; in particular the Villa Pia. But portable pictures of this artist are rarely to be met with, except, that being in company with Albani at Rome, his landscapes were frequently introduced into the pictures of the latter, and may be recognized in that city by judges as those of Viola, like Mola's in other pieces of Albani at Bologna. Grimaldi continued many years in the service of different pontiffs at Rome; and some years in that of the Car. Mazarini at Paris, and of Louis XIV. He surpassed Viola in good fortune as well as science; a noble architect, excellent in perspective, in figures, and as an engraver of Titian's landscapes and of his own. His prints display singular judgment in the individual parts, and great beauty in their edifices; he is also much more ample in drawing the foliage than the Caracci, and also very different; as is observed in the Lettere Pittoriche.[43] His design always answers to the workmanship; his touch is light, his colouring very strong, only partaking too much of the green. He was employed by Innocent X., in competition with other artists, in the Quirinal and in the Vatican palace; and was also selected to decorate some churches, in particular at S. Martino a' Monti. The Colonna gallery is enriched with his views, and he is often met with in others, though not so much sought after in foreign parts as Claude and Poussin. Such is their number, that I doubt not some of his works were executed by his son Alessandro, who, according to Orlandi, was a disciple and follower of Gio. Francesco. His specimens are not equally abundant at Bologna, where, about the same period, other landscape painters are known to have flourished.