This artist, whose real name was Francesco Raibolini, was, according to Malvasia, esteemed and celebrated as the first man of that age; and he might have added, in Bologna, where many so considered him; being there, as is attested by Vasari, held in the estimation of a god. The truth is, that he had a consummate genius for working in gold; on which account the medals and coins taken with his moulds rivalled those of Caradosso, the Milanese; and he was also an excellent painter, in that style which is termed modern antique, as may be gathered from a great number of collections, where his Madonnas rank at the side of those of Pietro Perugino and Gian Bellini. Raffaello, too, compares him with them, and even greater artists, in a letter dated 1508, edited by Malvasia, in which he praises his Madonnas, "never having beheld any more beautiful, more devotional in their expression, and more finely composed by any artist." His manner is nearly between that of these two heads of their schools, and participates in the excellence of both; it boasts Perugino's choiceness and tone of colours; while, in the fulness of its outlines, in the skill of the folding, and ample flow of the draperies, it bears greater resemblance to Bellini. His heads, however, do not equal the grace and sweetness of the former; though he is more dignified and varied than the latter. In the accessories of his landscapes he rivals both; but in landscape itself, and in the splendor of his architecture, he is inferior to them. In the composition of his pictures he is less fond of placing the divine infant in the bosom of the Virgin than upon a distinct ground, in the ancient manner of his school; and he sometimes adds to them some half figures of saints, as was customary with the Venetians of that period. On the whole, however, he approaches nearer to the Roman School; and, not unfrequently, as is noticed by Malvasia, his Madonnas have been ascribed by less expert judges to Pietro Perugino. He likewise produced works in fresco at Bologna, commended by Vasari; and both there and elsewhere are many of his altar-pieces yet remaining, displaying figures of larger dimensions than those usually painted by Bellini and Perugino; the peculiar merit of the Bolognese School, and by degrees extended to others, augmenting at once the grandeur of painting and of the temples it adorned.
But the chief praise due to him yet remains to be recorded, and this is, that he did not begin to exercise his pencil until he had arrived at manhood, and, in the course of a few years, displayed the rare example of becoming a scholar and a master, able to compete with the best artists of Ferrara and Modena. These, as we have mentioned, were invited by Gio. Bentivoglio, in order to decorate his palace. There, too, Francia was employed; and he was afterwards commissioned to paint the altar-piece of the Bentivogli chapel, in 1490, where he signed himself Franciscus Francia Aurifex, as much as to imply that he belonged to the goldsmith's art, not to that of painting. Nevertheless, that work is a beautiful specimen, displaying the most finished delicacy of art in every individual figure and ornament, especially in the arabesque pilasters, in the Mantegna manner. In process of time he enlarged his style; a circumstance that induced historians to make a distinction between his first and second manner. Cavazzoni, who wrote respecting the Madonnas of Bologna, wishes to persuade us that Raffaello himself had availed himself of Francia's models, in order to dilate that dry manner which he imbibed from Perugino. We shall award this glory to the genius of Raffaello, whose youthful performances at San Severo of Perugia, display a greater degree of softness than those of his master and of Francia; and after his genius, to the examples of F. Bartolommeo della Porta, and of Michelangiolo; leaving, we fear, no room to include the name of Francia. When Raffaello, at Rome, was regarded rather in the light of an angel than a man, and had already executed some works at Bologna, he began a correspondence with Francia, urged to it by his letters; Raffaello became his friend; and, on sending to Bologna his picture of S. Cecilia, he intreated him, on discovering any error in it, to correct it; an instance of modesty in our Apelles, more to be admired even than his paintings. This occurred in 1518, in which year Vasari closes his life of Francia, who he declares died with excess of passion, on first beholding that grand performance. Malvasia, however, refutes him, by proving Francia to "have lived many years afterwards, and when aged and declining, even to have changed his manner;" and in what way, except upon the models of Raffaello? In his new manner he painted and exhibited, in a chamber of the Mint, his celebrated piece of S. Sebastian, which, according to a tradition handed from the Caracci to Albano, and from the latter to Malvasia, served as a studio for the Bolognese pupils, who copied its proportions with as much zeal as the ancients would have done those of a statue of Polycletes, or the moderns of the Apollo, or of the supposed Antinous of Belvidere. Albani has added that Francia, on perceiving the concourse of people increase round his picture, and diminish round the St. Cecilia of Raffaello, then dead, apprehensive lest they should suspect him of having executed and exhibited his own in competition with such an artist, instantly removed and placed it in the church of the Misericordia, where, at this time, there remains a copy of it. The precise year of his decease, hitherto unknown, has been communicated to me by the Sig. Cav. Ratti, who found on an ancient drawing of a female saint, now in possession of Sig. Tommaso Bernardi, a noble of Lucca, a memorandum of this event having occurred on the seventh day of April, 1533.
Francia, in addition to his cousin Giulio, who devoted himself but little to painting, gave instructions in the art to his own son of the name of Giacomo. It is often doubtful, as we find in the Gallery of the princes Giustiniani, whether such a Madonna is by the hand of Francesco Francia, or by that of his son, who, in similar pictures imitated closely his father's style, although, in Malvasia's judgment, he never equalled it. In works on a larger scale too, he is sometimes to be pronounced inferior, in comparison with his father, as in S. Vitale, at Bologna, where Francesco painted the cherubs round a Madonna, in his first manner, somewhat meagre, perhaps, but still beautiful and full of animated movements, while Giacomo drew the figures, representing a Nativity of our Lord, more soft in point of design, but with features less beautiful, and in attitudes and expressions bordering on extravagance. At other times, the son seems to have surpassed the father, as at S. Giovanni, of Parma, where there is no artist who would not wish to have produced that fine picture by Giacomo, marked with the year 1519, rather than the Deposition from the Cross, by Francesco. Elsewhere too, as in the picture of S. Giorgio, at the church of San Francesco in Bologna, he rivals, perhaps, the finest works by his father; insomuch that this specimen was ascribed to the latter, until there was recently noticed the signature I., (meaning Jacobus) Francia, 1526. He appears, from the first, to have practised a design approaching that of the moderns; neither have I observed in his paintings such splendid gildings, nor such meagre arms, as for some time distinguished the elder Francia. He rather, in progress of time, continued to acquire a more free and easy manner, insomuch that a few of his Madonnas were more than once copied and engraved by Agostino Caracci. His heads were extremely animated, though generally less select, less studied, and less beautiful, than his father's. He had a son, named Giambatista, by whom there remains, at S. Rocco, an altar-piece, and a few other specimens, displaying mere mediocrity.
Among the foreign pupils of Francia, the Bolognese enumerated Lorenzo Costa, and, indeed, he thus ranks himself, by inscribing under the portrait of Gio. Bentivoglio, L. Costa Franciae discipulus. True it is, that such inscriptions, as I have frequently found, might come from another hand; or that, granting he wrote it, he may have done so more out of regard to such a man, than for the sake of acquainting the world, as Malvasia contends, that he had been his sole master. Vasari is of a different opinion, introducing him to us at Bologna as an established artist, already employed in several considerable cities, and bestowing the highest eulogium on his earliest production, the S. Sebastiano at the church of S. Petronio, declaring it the best specimen in water-colours that had, till then, been seen in the city. Add to this, that Francia exhibited his first altar-piece in the Bentivogli chapel in 1490, a few years after he had devoted himself to the art; and there Costa placed the two lateral pictures, tolerably excellent in point of composition, and filled with those very spirited portraits of his in 1488. Now had he boasted only Francia for his master, of what rapid improvement must we suppose him to have been capable! Besides, would not his style almost invariably resemble that of Francia, at least in the works he produced at Bologna? Yet the contrary is the case; and from his less free, and sometimes ill drawn figures; from the coarser expression of his countenances, his more hard and dull colouring, and his abundance of architecture, with the taste shewn in his perspective, it is evident he must have studied elsewhere. Still I believe that he received the rudiments of his education in his own country; that then passing into Tuscany, he formed himself, not by the voice, but, as Vasari avers, upon the pictures of Lippi and Gozzoli; and that finally seeking Bologna, he painted for the Bentivogli, and resided also with Francia rather in quality of an assistant than a pupil. A farther proof I gather from Malvasia himself; that in the journals of Francesco, in which he read the names of two hundred and twenty pupils, he found no mention of Costa. In the rest, however, I concur; as to his having availed himself of the works of Francia, in imitation of whom a number of Madonnas are seen in the collections at Bologna, much inferior to the paintings of the supposed master; but occasionally not unworthy of being compared with them. Such is an altar-piece, divided into several compartments, removed from Faenza into the Casa Ercolani; a production characterized by Crespi, in his annotations to Baruffaldi, as being executed "with a fervour, a refinement, softness, and a warmth which may be pronounced altogether Raffaellesque." He particularly shone in his countenances of men, as may be seen from those of the apostles at S. Petronio, and from his San Girolamo, which there offers the finest specimen of his art. He was less employed in his own country than in Bologna, though he gave several pupils to the former; among others the celebrated Dosso and Ercole of Ferrara. He mostly resided at Mantua, at which court he was highly appreciated, although Mantegna had been his immediate predecessor, and Giulio Romano succeeded him. I may refer to what I there wrote respecting this artist.
A less doubtful pupil of Francia's was Girolamo Marchesi da Cotignola. His portraits are much praised by Vasari, but his compositions much less so. He was by no means happy in all; and in particular one which he produced at Rimini, is severely criticised by the historian. There are various altar-pieces by him at Bologna and elsewhere, all of the usual composition of the quattrocentisti, which goes to redeem his fault. One of these, exhibiting very beautiful perspective, is in possession of the Serviti at Pesaro, where the Virgin is seen on a throne, before which, in a kneeling posture, is the Marchesa Ginevra Sforza, with her son Constantius II.; nor is this the only specimen of his works conducted in the service of royal houses. The design is rather dry, but the colour very pleasing; the heads grand, the draperies well disposed; and in short, were it the only production of his hand, he would well deserve to rank among the most illustrious painters in the old style. That he obtained no reputation at Rome, or Naples, as Vasari observes, was owing to his arriving in those cities too late, namely, in the pontificate of Paul III.; so that his style being then regarded merely in the light of an article out of fashion, he was unable to make his way. He died during the same pontificate, between the interval of 1534 and 1549. Orlandi, who brings in the decease of Cotignola as early as 1518, is not only refuted by the above dates marked by Vasari, and, with slight difference, by Baruffaldi, but moreover by a picture of S. Girolamo at the church of the conventual friars of S. Marino, executed in 1520.
Amico Aspertini is enrolled by Malvasia (pp. 58, 59) in the school of Francia, a fact that Vasari did not choose to notice, being wholly bent on amusing posterity with a portrait of the person and manners of "Mastro Amico," who was indeed a compound of pleasantry, eccentricity, and madness. He had adopted a maxim in painting, which in regard to literature, was commonly received in that age; to wit, that every individual ought to impress upon his works the image of his own genius; and, like Erasmus, who exposed to ridicule Cicero's imitators in writing, this artist was fond of deriding those of Raffaello in painting. It was his leading principle to take the tour of Italy, to copy here and there, without discrimination, whatever most pleased him, and afterwards to form a style of his own, "like an experienced inventor," to preserve an expression of Vasari. Conducted on this plan is a Pietà by him, in the church of S. Petronio, which may be compared with the trecentisti in point of forms, the attitudes, and the grouping of the figures. We may add, however, with Guercino, that this artist seemed to handle two pencils; with one of which he painted for low prices, or out of despite, or for revenge; and this he made use of in S. Petronio and several other pieces; the other he practised only on behalf of those who remunerated him honourably for his labours, and were cautious how they provoked him; and with this he displayed his art in various façades of palaces, commended by Vasari himself; in the church of S. Martino; and in many other works cited by Malvasia, who describes him as a good imitator of Giorgione.
He had an elder brother of the name of Guido, a youth who employed uncommon diligence and care, carried perhaps to excess, in his art. He died at the age of thirty-five, and was lamented by his more poetical fellow citizens in elegiac strains. Malvasia is of opinion, that, had he survived, he would have equalled the fame of Bagnacavallo; such was the promise held forth by a painting of the Crucifixion under the portico of S. Pietro, and by his other works. According to the same biographer, it was Vasari's malice which led him to assign Ercole of Ferrara for Guido's master, being jealous of affording M. Amico the fame of forming such a pupil. I feel persuaded, with Vasari, no less from the age of Guido than from his taste, and from the date of 1491, which he inscribed on this highly commended picture, that assuredly it cannot belong to the pupil of a pupil formed by Francia. Similar critical errors we have already noticed in Baldinucci; and they are not very easily to be avoided where a party spirit is apt to prevail.
Gio. Maria Chiodarolo, a rival of the preceding, and subsequently of Innocenzo da Imola, in the palace of Viola, left behind him a name above the generality of this school. Malvasia mentions twenty-four other scholars of Francesco Francia, in which he was followed by Orlandi, when treating of Lorenzo Gandolfi. By some mistake these pupils are referred by him to Costa; while Bottari, misled by Orlandi, fell into the same error, although he laments "that men, in order to spare trouble, are apt to follow one another like sheep or cranes." Yet in very extensive and laborious works it is difficult sometimes not to nod; nor should I occasionally note down others' inequalities, except in the hope of finding readers considerate enough to extend the same liberality towards mine. The forementioned names will prove of much utility to those who, in Milan, in Pavia, in Parma, and other places in Italy, may turn their attention to works in the ancient Bolognese style, and may hear them attributed, as it often happens, to Francia, instead of the pupils formed by him to practice in those districts, and invariably tenacious of his manner. He had also others, who from their intercourse with more modern artists, claim place in a better epoch; and for such we shall reserve them.
We must previously however take a survey of some cities of Romagna, and select what seems to belong to our present argument. We shall commence with Ravenna, a city that preserved design during periods of barbarism better than any other in Italy. Nor do we elsewhere meet with works in mosaic so well composed, and in ivory, or in marble, cut in so able a manner; all vestiges of a power and grandeur worthy of exciting the jealousy of Rome, when the seat of her princes and exarchs was removed to Ravenna. This city too having fallen from its splendour, and after many vicissitudes being governed by the Polentani, was no less indebted to them for an illustrious poet in the person of Dante, than a great painter in Giotto.[6] This artist painted in the church called Porto di Fuori, several histories from the evangelists, which still remain there; and at S. Francesco and other places in the city, we may trace reliques of his pencil, or at least of his style. The Polentani being expelled, and the state brought under the subjection of Venice, from this last capital the city of Ravenna derived the founder of a new school.
This was Niccolo Rondinello, mentioned by Vasari as one "who, above all others, imitated Gian Bellini, his master, to whom he did credit, and assisted him in all his works." In the life of Bellini, and in that of Palma, Vasari gives a list of his best paintings, exhibited in Ravenna. In these his progress is very perceptible. He displays most of the antique in his picture of S. Giovanni, placed in that church, for which he also executed one of the Virgin, upon a gold ground. His taste is more modern in the larger altar-piece of San Domenico; whose composition rises above the monotony of the age, giving a representation of saints in great variety of attitudes and situations. The design is exact, though always inclining to dryness, the countenances less select, and the colouring less vivid than those of his master; with equal care in his draperies, richly ornamented with embroidery in the taste of those times. It is, however, uncertain whether he had obtained any idea of the last and most perfect style of Bellini.