BOOK I.

VENETIAN SCHOOL.

This School would have required no farther illustration from any other pen, had Signor Antonio Zanetti, in his highly esteemed work upon Venetian Painting, included a more ample consideration of the artists of the state, instead of confining his attention wholly to those, whose productions, ornamenting the churches and other public places, had all been completed in the city of Venice alone. He has, nevertheless, rendered distinguished service to any one ambitious of succeeding him, and of extending the same subject beyond these narrower limits; since he has observed the most lucid order in the arrangement of epochs, in the description of styles, in estimating the merits of various painters, and thus ascertaining the particular rank as well as the age belonging to each. Those artists then, whom he has omitted to commemorate, may be easily reduced under one or other of the divisions pointed out by him, and the whole history enlarged upon the plan which he first laid down.

In cultivating an acquaintance with these additional names, the memorials collected by Vasari; afterwards, on a more extensive scale, by the Cavaliere Ridolfi, in his Lives of the Venetian Painters; and by Boschini, in the Miniere della Pittura, in the Carta del Navegar Pittoresco, and in other works: materials drawn from all parts of the Venetian state—will be of signal advantage to us. No one, it is hoped, will feel displeased at the introduction of the name of Vasari, against whom the historians of the Venetian School were louder in their complaints than even those of the Roman, the Siennese, and the Neapolitan Schools; all whose causes of difference I have elsewhere recounted, adding to them, whenever I found them admissible, my own refutations. These it would be needless now to repeat, in reply to the Venetian writers. I shall merely observe that Vasari bestowed very ample commendations upon the Venetian professors, in different parts of his history, and more particularly in the lives of Carpaccio, of Liberale, and of Pordenone. Let me add that if he was occasionally betrayed into errors, either from want of more correct information, or from a degree of jealousy or spirit of patriotic rivalry, which probably may have secretly influenced him in his opinions, it will be no difficult task in the present enlightened period,^[1] to substitute the real names, more exact accounts, and more impartial examinations of the earlier professors of the school.^[2]

In respect to the more modern, up to whose period he did not reach, I possess historical matter, which, if not very copious, is certainly less scanty than such as relates to many of the other Schools of Italy. Besides Ridolfi, Boschini, and Zanetti, it includes the historians of the particular cities, the same from whom Orlandi selected his various notices of artists; and among whom none is to be preferred to Signor Zamboni for the fulness and authenticity of his materials, in his work, entitled Fabbriche di Brescia. I am, moreover, in possession of several authors who have distinctly treated of the lives, or published other accounts of those who flourished in their own cities;—such as the Commendatore del Pozzo, in his notice of the Veronese,^[3] Count Tassi of those of Bergamo, and Signor Verci of the Bassanese artists. And no slight assistance may also be drawn from the different "Guides," or descriptions of paintings, exhibited in many cities of the state, although they are far from being all of equal merit. There is the "Guida Trevigiana," of Rigamonti, that of Vicenza printed by Vendramini Mosca, that of Brescia by Carboni, and that of Verona, expressly drawn from the "Verona Illustrata" of the Marquis Maffei, with the still more valuable one of Venice, dated 1733, from the able pen of Antonio M. Zanetti. To these we may likewise add that first published by Rossetti, now revised and improved by Brandolese, abounding with historical memoirs of the painters of Padua; and the Guide of Rovigo by Bartoli, communicating much new and interesting information, which serves to point out more accurately certain eras among the professors of the art, while the same may, in part, be observed of that of Bergamo, by the Dottore Pasta. Nor are these all; for I am not a little indebted to several notices published in the "Elogj" of Signor Longhi, and in some of the catalogues of private collections; besides other anecdotes, in part collected by myself, in part^[4] communicated by my friends, and in particular by the very accomplished Sig. Gio. Maria Sasso,^[5] who has already promised to gratify us with his "Venezia Pittrice," accompanied with designs of the most esteemed paintings of this school, accurately engraved.

VENETIAN SCHOOL.

EPOCH I.

The Ancients.

If in the outset of each school of painting I were to pursue the example held up in the Etruria Pittrice, of introducing the account of its pictures by that of some work in mosaic, I ought here to mention those of Grado, wrought in the sixth century, distinguished by the name of the Patriarch Elia, those of Torcello, and a few other specimens that appeared at Venice, in the islands, and in Terra Firma, produced at periods subsequent to the increase of the edifices, together with the grandeur of the Venetian state. But admitting that these mosaics, like many at Rome, may really be the production of the Greeks; the title of my work, confined as it is to painting, and to the period of its revival in Italy, leads me to be little solicitous respecting those more ancient monuments of the fine arts, remnants of which are to be found scattered here and there, without any series of a school. I shall still, however, occasionally allude to them, according as I find needful, were it only for the sake of illustration and comparison, as I proceed. But such information ought to be sought for in other works; mine professes only to give the history of painting from the period of its revival.

The most ancient pictorial remains in the Venetian territories I believe to be at Verona, in a subterraneous part of the nunnery of Santi Nazario and Celso, which, however inaccessible to the generality of virtuosi, have, nevertheless, been engraved on a variety of plates by order of the indefatigable Signor Dionisi. In this, which was formerly the Chapel of the Faithful, are represented several mysteries of our redemption; some apostles, some holy martyrs, and in particular the transit of one of the righteous from this life, on whom the archangel, St. Michael, is seen bestowing his assistance. Here the symbols, the workmanship, the design, the attitudes, the drapery of the figures, and the characters united, permit us not to doubt that the painting must be much anterior to the revival of the arts in Italy. But most writers seem to trace the rudiments of Venetian painting from the eleventh century, about the year 1070, at the period when the Doge Selvo invited the mosaic workers from Greece to adorn the magnificent temple, consecrated to St. Mark the Evangelist. Such artificers, however rude, must have been acquainted, in some degree, with the art of painting; none being enabled to work in mosaic who had not previously designed and coloured, upon pasteboard or cartoon, the composition they intended to execute.

And these, observe the same writers, were the first essays of the art of painting in Venice. However this may be, it speedily took root, and began to flourish after the year 1204, when Constantinople being taken, Venice was in a short time filled, not indeed with Grecian artists, but with their pictures, statues, and bassi relievi.^[6] Had I not here restricted my observations to existing specimens of the art, bestowing only a rapid glance upon the rest, along with their authors, I might prove, that from the above period, the city was no longer destitute of artists; and was enabled, in the thirteenth century, to form a company of them with their appropriate laws and institutions.

But of these elder masters of the art, there remains either only the name, as of a Giovanni da Venezia and a Martinello da Bassano, or some solitary relic of their labours without a name, as in the sarcophagus, in wood, of the Beata Giuliana, painted about the year 1262, the same in which she died. This monument remains in her own monastery of San Biagio alla Guidecca, long held in veneration, even after the body of the blessed saint had been removed, in the year 1297, into an urn of stone. There are there represented San Biagio, the titular saint of the church, San Cataldo, the bishop, and the blessed Giuliana, the two former in an upright, the latter in a kneeling posture; their names are written in Latin, and the style, although coarse, is nevertheless not Greek. Probably that of the painter is also in the same corner, a picture of whom, a Pietà, has recently been discovered by the Ab. Boni, who considers him a new Cimabue of the Venetian art. As it has already been described by him in his Florentine collection of "Opuscoli Scientifici,"^[7] I shall not extend my account of it; for the reader will there find other names, as will afterwards be shewn, recently discovered by the indefatigable author of some early Venetian writers, until this period unknown to history. Among these are Stefano Pievano, of S. Agnese, a picture by whom, dated 1381, is described; Alberegno, belonging to the fifteenth century, and one Esegrenio, who flourished somewhat later, to which time we may refer two fine and highly valued figures of holy virgins, not long since discovered, of Tommaso da Modena, and which, from the disputes they have elicited, have been subjected to experiments at Florence, to ascertain whether they are painted in oil or distemper—experiments that tend only to prove that this Tommaso was unacquainted with the art of colouring in oil.

It was only subsequent to the year 1300, that the names, united to the productions of the Venetians, began to make themselves manifest; when, partly by the examples held out by Giotto, partly by their own assiduity and talent, the painters of the city and of the state visibly improved, and softened the harshness of their manner. Giotto, according to a MS. cited by Rossetti,^[8] was at Padua in 1306; according to Vasari, he returned from Avignon in 1316; and a little while afterwards he was painting at Verona, in the palace of Can della Scala, and at Padua, employed on a chapel in the church of the titular saint. He adds, that towards the close of his days he was again invited there, and embellished other places with his pieces. Nothing, however, remains of him in Verona; but in Padua there still exists the chapel of the Nunziata all'Arena, divided all round into compartments, in each of which is represented some scriptural event. It is truly surprising to behold, not less on account of its high state of preservation, beyond any other of his frescos, than for its full expression of native grace, together with that air of grandeur which Giotto so well knew how to unite. With respect to the chapel, it is believed that Vasari was less accurately informed, inasmuch as Savonarola, who has been cited by Sig. Morelli,^[9] relates that Giotto ornamented the little church of the Arena, capitulumque Antonii nostri, and the chapter of our St. Antony. And in fact, in the apartment of the chapter house, there yet remain several traces of ancient painting, though turned white with age. In a very ancient MS., of the year 1312,^[10] there is made mention of his also having been employed in Palatio Comitis, which others suppose ought to be read Communis, intended to apply to the Saloon, of which I shall shortly have to give some account.

To Giotto succeeded Giusto Padovano, so called from the place of his naturalization and usual residence; being, in truth, a Florentine, sprung from the family of the Menabuoi. As a disciple of Giotto, Vasari attributes to him the very extensive work which adorns the church of St. John the Baptist. In the picture over the altar, if it be his, Giusto has exhibited various histories of St. John the Baptist; on the walls are represented both scriptural events and mysteries of the Apocalypse; and on the cupola he has drawn a Choir of Angels, where we behold, as if in a grand consistory, the blessed arrayed in various garments, seated upon the ground; simple, indeed, in its conception, but executed with an incredible degree of diligence and felicity. It is mentioned in the Notizia Morelli, that formerly there was to be read there an inscription over one of the gates—Opus Johannis et Antonii de Padua,—probably companions of Giusto, and, probably, as is conjectured by the author of the MS. above alluded to, the painters of the whole temple. This would seem to augment the number of the Paduan artists, no less than the imitators of Giotto; since the works, already described, are equally as much in his manner as those by Taddeo Gaddi, or any other of his fellow pupils in Florence. The same commendation is bestowed upon Jacopo Davanzo, of whom I treat more at length in the school of Bologna. A less faithful follower of Giotto was Guariento, a Paduan, held in high esteem about the year 1360, as appears from the honourable commissions he obtained from the Venetian senate. One of his frescos and a crucifixion yet remain at Bassano;^[11] and in the choir of the Eremitani, at Padua, there are many of his figures now retouched, from which Zanetti took occasion to commend him for his rich invention, the spirit of his attitudes, and the felicity with which, at so early a period, he disposed his draperies. At Padua there is an ancient church, dedicated to St. George, erected about 1377, which boasts some history pieces of St. James, executed by the hand of Alticherio, or Aldigieri, da Zevio in the Veronese; and others of St. John, the work of one Sebeto,^[12] says the historian, a native of Verona. These, likewise, approach pretty nearly the style of Giotto, and more especially the first, who painted also a good deal in his native place.

To these two I may add Jacopo da Verona, known only by his numerous paintings in fresco at San Michele of Padua, which remain in part entire; and Taddeo Bartoli, of Siena, who has shewn himself ambitious at the Arena, of emulating the contiguous labours of Giotto, without attaining the object in view. Another production of the same period is seen in the great hall at Padua, reported to be one of the largest in the world, consisting, as it does, of a mixture of sacred historic pieces, of celestial signs borrowed from Igino, and of the various operations carried on during the respective months of the year, besides several other ideas certainly furnished by some learned man of that age. It is partly the work, says Morelli in his Notizia, upon the authority of Campagnuola, of an artist of Ferrara, and partly that of Gio. Miretto, a Paduan. This recent discovery justifies my own previous opinions, having been unable to prevail upon myself to ascribe such a production to Giotto, although it partakes strongly of his style, which appears to have spread pretty rapidly throughout the territories of Padua, of Verona, of Bergamo, and great part of the Terra Ferma.

Besides this manner, which may be, in some measure, pronounced foreign, there are others equally observable in Venice, no less than in Treviso, in the Chapter of the Padri Predicatori, and in other of the subject cities, and these might more accurately be termed national, so remote are they from the style of Giotto, and that of his disciples before mentioned. I have elsewhere pointed out how far the miniature painters contributed to this degree of originality, a class of artists, with whom Italy, at no time destitute, more fully abounded about that period, while they still continued to improve by employing their talents in drawing objects from the life, and not from any Greek or Italian model. Indeed they had already made no slight advances in every branch of painting, when Giotto first arrived in those parts. I have myself seen, in the grand collection of MSS., made in Venice, by the Abbate Canonici, a book of the Evangelists, obtained in Udine, illustrated with miniatures in pretty good taste for the thirteenth century, in which they were produced; and similar relics are by no means rare throughout the libraries of the state. I suspect, therefore, that many of those new painters, either having been pupils of the miniaturists, or induced to imitate them from the near connexion between the arts, attempted to vie with them in design, in the distribution of their colours, and in their compositions. Hence, it is clearly accounted for, why they did not become the disciples, though acquainted with the works of Giotto, but produced several respectable pieces of their own.

To this class belongs M. Paolo, whom Zanetti found recorded in an ancient parchment, bearing the date of 1346. He is the earliest in the national manner, of whom there exists a work with the indisputable name of its author. It is to be seen in the great church of St. Mark, consisting of a tablet, or, as it is otherwise called, Ancona, divided into several compartments, representing the figure of a dead Christ, with some of the Apostles, and historic incidents from the holy Evangelist. There is inscribed underneath—Magister Paulus cum Jacobo, et Johanne filiis fecit hoc opus; and Signor Zanetti, page 589, observes in regard to it as follows:—Among the specimens of simple painting, in St. Mark's, the ball centre of the great altar is remarkable for several small tablets of gold and silver, on which are painted several figures in the ancient Greek manner. San Pietro Urseolo had it constructed about the year 980, at Constantinople, and it was removed to this place in the time of the Doge Ordelafo Faliero, in 1102, though it was afterwards renovated by command of the Doge Pietro Ziani, in 1209. This historian did not discover the inscription which I found upon it in the year 1782. The artist is sufficiently distinguished for the period in which he flourished, although the stiffness in the design, false action, and expression, beyond those of the best followers of Giotto, are perceptible, so much as to remind us of the Greek specimens of art.^[13]

There can, likewise, be no doubt, that a painter of the name of Lorenzo, was one of these Venetians, whose altarpiece in St. Antony of Castello, to which is attached his name, with the date of 1358, paid him three hundred gold ducats, has been commended by Zanetti. Besides, we read inscribed on a picture belonging to the noble house of Ercolani, at Bologna, the words manu laurentii de venetiis, 1368; and there is every appearance of his being the author of the fresco in the church of Mezzaratta, not far from Bologna, representing Daniel in the lions' den; and bearing the signature of Laurentius, P. It is a work that bears no resemblance to the style of Giotto, and appears to have been completed about the year 1370. It is equally certain that Niccolo Semitecolo was a Venetian, he having also inscribed his name as we find it written upon a Trinity, which represents the Virgin, along with some histories of St. Sebastian, still preserved in the chapter library of Padua:—"Nicoleto Semitecolo da Veniexia impense, 1367." The work is an excellent specimen of this school; the naked parts are tolerably well drawn, and the proportions of the figures, though sometimes extravagantly so, are bold and free; and what is more important to our present purpose, it discovers no resemblance to the style of Giotto, being inferior in point of design, though equal to him in regard to the colouring. Two other painters, whose style betrays nothing of Giotto, were discovered by Signor Sasso, in Venice, upon the strength of two altarpieces, to which they had affixed their names. Upon one, found in the convent of Corpus Domini, he read Angelus pinxit; and upon the other, also in the same place, Katarinus pinxit. While on this subject, I ought not to pass over the opinion of Baldinucci himself, who always appears to have respected the freedom and independence of the Venetian as opposed to the Florentine school, by refusing to insert the name of a single Venetian in his tree of Cimabue. He merely maintained, that the Venetian painters had improved their style by the labours of Angiol Gaddi, and of one Antonio, a Venetian, whom, in spite of the authority of Vasari, he has declared to be a Florentine; on which point we must refer to what has already been stated in the first volume (p. 61) of this work. Moreover, he asserts of the same Antonio, that he took up his residence at Venice, and thence acquired the appellation of Veneziano; but that he took his departure again, owing to the intrigues of the national professors, as much as to say, of a school formed anterior to his arrival. And so long anterior was it, indeed, that the whole state, as well as the adjacent places, abounded not less with pictures than with pupils, although few of their names with their productions have survived.^[14]

Among these few is a Simon da Cusighe, who painted an altarpiece and a fresco, still remaining in his native parish, situated near the city of Belluno, where there exist memorials of one Pietro, and other artists of the thirteenth century, along with some very tolerably executed figures, bearing the epigraph of Simon pinxit. To these I add a native of Friuli, of whom there are no authentic remains beyond Gemona, where he painted the façade of the dome, and under a picture of the martyrdom of I know not what saint, appears his name written, mcccxxxii. magister nicolaus pintor me fecit. To this artist is ascribed, by some writers, that vast and meritorious production, still in such a fine state of preservation, ornamenting the dome of Venzone, and which represents the solemn scene of the Consecration; but its author is a matter of mere conjecture, founded in this instance upon the vicinity of the place and time, and resemblance of manner. There are also Pecino and Pietro de Nova, who employed their talents, during a period of many years subsequent to 1363, in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, at Bergamo. But these, like the artist of Padua before mentioned, approach very nearly the composition of Giotto, and possibly might have imbibed such a taste at Milan.^[15]

The splendor of Venetian painting becomes more strikingly manifest in the fifteenth century; a period that was gradually preparing the way for the grand manner of the Titians and the Giorgioni. The new style took its rise in one of the islands called Murano; but it was destined to attain its perfection in Venice. I first recognized the work of one of the oldest of these artists, subscribing himself, Quiricius de Muriano, in the studio of Signor Sasso. It represents our Saviour in a sitting posture, at whose feet stands a veiled devotee; but there is no mark by which to ascertain its age. There is, likewise, of uncertain date, yet still very ancient, a Bernardino da Murano, of whose productions Zanetti saw nothing more than a rude altarpiece. An Andrea da Murano flourished about the period 1400, whose style, whatever it may retain of harsh and dry, neither superior in composition, nor in choice of features to that of his predecessors, discovers him to have been tolerably skilful in design, even in regard to the extremities, and in placing his figures well in the canvass.

There remains in his native place, at San Pier Martire, an altarpiece painted by his hand, in which a St. Sebastian forms so conspicuous a figure for the beauty of its torso, that Zanetti suspects it must have been copied from some ancient statue. It is he who introduced the art into the house of the Vivarini, his compatriots, who in a continued line of succession preserved the school of Murano for nearly a century; and who produced as rich a harvest of their labours in Venice, as did the Campi afterwards in the city of Cremona, or the Procaccini in Milan. I shall treat of them with brevity, but with such new sources of information, as will at once serve to correct and amplify what has already been written.

The first among the Vivarini mentioned by historians is Luigi, of whom a painting at Santi Giovanni e Paolo, has been cited by them, which represents our Redeemer bearing the cross upon his shoulders. The work has been a good deal retouched, and there has been added to it another portion, which gives the name of the author, dated 1414. Not being an autograph, we are led to suspect some kind of mistake attaching either to the name or the date; there having been another Luigi Vivarini, as we shall shew, towards the close of the century. The one in question, then, might probably be an ancestor of the latter, though it be difficult to persuade ourselves of it, as there remains no other superscription, or notice of any of that name so ancient.

Next to this artist, according to Ridolfo and Zanetti, are to be enumerated Giovanni and Antonio Vivarini, who flourished about the year 1440. The authority they adduce for this, is an altarpiece in San Pantaleone, which bears the inscription of Zuane e Antonio da Muran pense 1444. But this Giovanni,^[16] if I mistake not, is the same who signs his name on another picture in Venice, Joannes de Alemania et Antonius de Muriano pinxit; or as it is thus written in Padua, Antonio de Muran e Zohan Alamanus pinxit. Giovanni, therefore, was a companion of Antonio, a German by birth; and traces of a foreign style are clearly perceptible in his paintings. The reason of his omitting to insert his birthplace in the picture at San Pantaleone, arose, I suspect, from the fact of his name and acquaintance with Antonio being too well known to admit of doubt. After the year 1447 there is no more mention made of Giovanni, but only of Antonio; sometimes alone, sometimes together with some other of the Vivarini. Thus, his name is subscribed alone in San Antonio Abate di Pesaro, upon an altarpiece of the titular saint, surrounded by the figures of three young martyrs, with some smaller paintings attached; the production of a very animated colourist, and displaying forms inferior to none in the school of Murano. I have seen two other specimens, in which he is mentioned together with a second Vivarino. The least excellent of these is to be found in San Francesco Grande, at Padua, consisting of a Madonna, with some saints, in various compartments; and, at the foot of it, is the following memorandum, Anno 1451, Antonius et Bartholomeus fratres de Murano pinxerunt hoc opus. Similar to this, the two brothers had produced another the year preceding, in the Certosa of Bologna, where it is still in a high state of preservation, beyond any other specimen I have seen belonging to this family. There is much worthy of commendation in each figure of the whole piece; features dignified and devout; appropriate dresses; care in the disposition of the hair and beards, united to a colouring warm and brilliant.

According to what appears, Bartolommeo must have been held of less account than Antonio, until the discovery of painting in oil being introduced into Venice, he became one among the first to profit by it, and, towards the period in which the two Bellini appeared, was held in pretty high repute.

The first specimen of his painting in oil exists at S. Giovanni e Paolo, not far from the gate, and exhibits, among other saints, P. San Agostino, with an indication of the year 1473. From that period he continued to distinguish himself, producing a great number of pieces both in oil and in water colour, sometimes with more, and sometimes with less care, but always in the ancient taste for subdividing the altarpiece into several parts, in each of which he represented separate heads or entire figures. In these he often marked the name of Vivarino, with the year of their production; and occasionally he has added a finch or linnet by way of allusion to his family name. His last work, bearing the date of the year, is a Christ risen from the dead, at San Giovanni, in Bragora, where Boschini read the date of 1498, which is now no longer apparent; but it is a piece which, in every part, may be said to vie with that of the best Venetian artists who flourished during the same period.

Contemporary with him was a Luigi of the same name, one of whose productions was seen by Zanetti, in a collection of paintings, with the date of 1490, and as appeared to him, strongly approaching, in point of taste, to the best style of Bartolommeo. To Luigi, also, must undoubtedly be ascribed the altarpiece, which, in San Francesco di Trevigi, bears his name. There is another at the Battuti, in Belluno, representing the saints Piero, Girolamo, and some others, a work which cost that school 100 gold ducats, besides the expenses of the artist, who has attached to it his name. But superior to every other of his existing specimens, is that fine picture in the school of San Girolamo, at Venice, in which he represented a history of the titular saint, in emulation of Giovanni Bellino, whom he here equalled, and of Carpaccio, whom he surpassed. He has drawn the saint in the act of caressing a lion, while several monks are seen flying in terror at the sight. The composition is very fine; the passions are tolerably well pourtrayed, the colours as soft and delicate as in any other of the Vivarini; the architecture solid, and in the ancient taste, while the epoch is more modern than that which could be ascribed to the supposed Luigi, the elder. Such is our exposition of the whole series of the School of Murano, up to the period of its greatest improvement, so as to bring it under one point of view. I shall now, therefore, resume the thread of my narrative, relating to the elder artists of the fourteenth century, who competed with the oldest of the school of Murano, until the era of painting in oil; and I shall afterwards proceed to treat apart of the more modern.

In the early part of the century, an artist of the name of Gentile da Fabriano, had been employed in the public palace at Venice, highly distinguished in his time, but of whom I must not here repeat what has been said in the first volume of this work. He there depicted a naval battle scene, a production greatly extolled in former times, which has long since perished. He produced, also, some disciples, as we find mention of a Jacopo Nerito, from Padua, who, in a painting at San Michele di Padova, according to Rossetti, subscribes himself one of his pupils. Nasocchio di Bassano, the elder, is to be ranked also, either as one of his scholars or his imitators, if, indeed, a small picture pointed out to me by the late Signor Verci was by his hand.

Among other Venetians, Jacopo Bellini, at once the father and the master of Gentile and Giovanni of the same name, of whom more hereafter, was certainly a pupil of Gentile da Fabriano. Jacopo, however, is better known by the celebrity of his sons, than by his own works, at this time either destroyed or unknown. He had painted in the school of S. Giovanni Evangelista at Venice, and in the chapel of the Gatta Melata, at the Santo di Padova, about 1456; but these labours survive only in history, nor have I met with any other specimen besides a Madonna, discovered by Sig. Sasso, bearing the signature of its author. The style appears taken from that of Squarcione, to which he is supposed to have applied himself in his more advanced years.

There was also another Jacopo in very high repute,^[17] called Jacobello del Fiore, who has been falsely accused by Vasari, of having drawn his figures all resting on the tip of their toes, in the manner of the Greeks. His father, Francesco, was considered in the light of a Coryphæus of the art, and his tomb is still to be seen at Santi Giovanni e Paolo, with a figure of him in his toga, and a commendatory epitaph in Latin verse. No works of his, however, are to be seen in Venice,^[18] a dittico, or small altar, with his name having been conveyed to London, bearing the date of 1412. It was obtained by the Chevalier Strange, together with some other productions of the old Venetian artists. The son of Francesco rose to a still higher degree of celebrity. He began to make himself known as early as 1401, by producing an altarpiece at San Cassiano di Pesaro, in which city I discovered another, with the date of 1409, and both bear the signature of Jacometto de Flor. A much nobler work is a coronation of the Virgin, in the cathedral of Ceneda, extremely rich in figures, insomuch as to have deserved the name of the "Painting of Paradise," in a MS. of the lives of the bishops of that place, which is preserved in the episcopal residence, and declares the work to have been executed, ab eximio illius temporis pictore Jacobello de Flore, 1432, at the expense of the bishop, Ant. Correr. There is a Madonna, indisputably by his hand, in possession of Sig. Girolamo Manfrini, painted in 1436, besides the Giustizia, drawn between two archangels, in the Magistrato del Proprio, bearing the date of 1421. I may venture to say that few artists of that time equalled him; both on account of his having few rivals who had so early ventured to attempt drawing figures as large as the life, and because of his power of conferring upon them a certain grace and dignity, and, where called for, a vigour and ease rarely to be met with in other paintings. The two lions which he represented as symbols of his Giustizia (Justice), are truly grand, though the rest of the figures would have appeared to more advantage had they been less loaded with ornaments, and in particular the draperies glowing with gold lace, according to the custom of his age. He had a rival in Giacomo Morazone, known by an altarpiece seen in the island of St. Elena, of which I shall have to speak elsewhere.

Two pupils of Jacobello are recorded by Ridolfi, one of whom, Donato, is superior to his master in point of style, and the other, Carlo Crivelli, of whom the capital can boast only one or two pieces, and of whom little mention is made in Venetian history. It would appear that he long resided out of his native place, and in the Marca Trevigiana, from which circumstance we find him repeatedly named in the Storia Picena, in the Guida di Ascoli, and in the catalogue of Fabrianese paintings. At San Francesco di Matelica, I saw an altarpiece and grado by his hand, with his name in the following inscription—Carolus Crivellus Venetus miles pinxit, as well as another with his name at the Osservanti, in Macerata, and a third which bears the year 1476, in possession of the Cardinal Zelada. He is an artist more remarkable for his force of colouring than for his correctness of design: and his principal merit consists in those little history pieces, in which he has represented beautiful landscapes, and given to his figures grace, motion, and expression, with some traces of the colouring of the School of Perugia. Hence his productions have occasionally been taken for those of Pietro, as in the instance of that in Macerata; and if I mistake not, such an opinion was entertained, even by the learned Father Civalli, (p. 60). In Piceno, likewise, in Monsanmartino, or in Penna S. Giovanni, there remain altarpieces by Vittorio Crivelli, a Venetian, most probably of the same family, and produced in the years 1489 and 90, from which period I lose sight of him, whether owing to his early decease, or his having set out in pursuit of better fortune into foreign parts.

Hitherto we have examined only the productions of the capital and of the annexed island. But in each of the other cities, now comprehended in the state, there flourished painters during the same period, guided by maxims differing both from those of Venice and of Murano. The School of Bergamo had even then made distinguished progress under the direction of the two Nova, who died at the commencement of the century; and mention is made of a Commenduno, one of their pupils, besides some other contemporaries, whose works, however, cannot, with any degree of certainty, be pointed out. The same may be said of those in the adjacent city of Brescia, which could then, also, boast of possessing some excellent artists. Of these, there is nothing more than the name now remaining, yet Brandolin Testorino and Ottaviano Brandino are names placed in competition with that of Gentile di Fabriano, and, perhaps, they are preferred to him. The former was supposed to have been engaged along with Altichiero, in ornamenting the great hall in Padua, entitled Sala de' Giganti.^[19]

Subsequent to both of these appeared Vincenzio Foppa, of Brescia, founder of an ancient school at Milan, of which I shall treat more at length in the following book. Vasari makes mention of a Vincenzio da Brescia, or Vincenzio Verchio, who is the same Vincenzo Civerchio di Crema, commended by Ridolfo, and so much admired by the French in the capture of Crema, that they fixed upon one of his pictures, then ornamenting the public palace, to be presented to their king, and to this artist we shall also again allude.

About the commencement of the fifteenth century there flourished, in Verona, an artist of the name of Stefano,^[20] declared, as it appears to me, by Vasari, sometimes a native of Verona, sometimes of Zevio, a territory adjacent to the former. The same author makes honourable mention of him in several places, exalting him above the best disciples of Angiolo Gaddi, to whose style, judging from what I have myself observed at San Fermo and elsewhere, he added a certain dignity and beauty of form, while such was his excellence in frescos, as to be extolled by Donatello beyond any of the artists who were then known for similar compositions in those parts.^[21]

The Commendatore del Pozzo brings his labours down as far as the year 1463, an incredible assertion, as applied to a scholar of Gaddi. To this period might better be referred Vincenzio di Stefano, apparently one of his sons, of whom nothing survives but his name, and the tradition of having conferred the first lessons of the art upon Liberale.

Highly distinguished, on the other hand, both by the consent of the Veronese and of foreigners, is the name of Vittor Pisanello; although there exists great confusion of dates in his history. Vasari makes him a disciple of Castagno, who died about the year 1480; yet del Pozzo informs us that he has in his house a holy figure, with the annexed signature of Vittore, and dated 1406, most probably before the birth of Castagno. Again we are told by Oretti that he was in possession of one of his medals, representing the Sultan Mahomet, struck in the year 1481, a supposition which, admitting the picture of Pozzo, we are unable to reconcile to facts, so that the medal was, perhaps, taken from some painting of Pisanello, coloured at a former time. To whatever master Vittore may have been indebted, certain it is that several of his too partial admirers have placed him above Masaccio, in regard to the services rendered by him towards the progress of the art, though impartial judges will not refuse to give him a station near him. The whole of his labours, both in Venice and in Rome, have now perished. At Verona, also, little remains; even that noble piece of San Eustachio, so highly extolled by Vasari himself, having been destroyed; and his Nunziata, at San Fermo, being greatly defaced by time, in which, however, is still visible a country house, thrown into such admirable perspective, as to delight the beholder. There remain several little altarpieces, containing histories of San Bernardino, finished in the style of the miniaturists, in the sacristy of San Francesco; but they are crude in their colouring, and the figures more than usually long and dry. The Guide of the city announces them as the productions of Pisanello; but there is no authority for this, and upon the strength of a date of 1473, which is seen upon one of them, I do not scruple to pronounce them by another hand. He is commended by Facio, (p. 47) for his almost poetical style of expression; and there is a specimen of an effort at caricature, with which Vittore embellished his historic painting of Frederick Barbarossa, in the ducal palace at Venice. He is, moreover, praised by the same author for his skill in drawing horses and other animals, in which he surpassed every other artist. His name is not unknown to the antiquaries; many medals struck by him, of different princes, being found in museums, which acquired for him, in an equal degree with his pictures, the esteem and applauses of Guarino, of Vespasiano Strozza, of Biondo, and of several other distinguished scholars.

In the adjacent city of Vicenza, resided a Jacopo Tintorello, strongly resembling Vittore in his style of colouring, however inferior to him in the perfection of his design, as far as we are enabled to judge from a picture of the Saviour, with a crown of thorns, exhibited at Santa Corona; a piece which reflects credit upon that school. It is yet more highly honoured by an Epiphany, painted in San Bartolommeo, by Marcello Figolino, an artist commemorated by Ridolfi, under the name of Giovanni Batista, and who flourished, according to his account, at the period of the two Montagna. He must, however, at that time, have been far advanced in years, if it be true that the era of his birth preceded that of Gian Bellini.^[22] His manner is undoubtedly original; so much so, that I find nothing resembling it, either in Venice or elsewhere; it embraces great diversity of countenance, and of costume, skilful gradation of light and shade, with landscape and perspective; and is remarkable for ornament, and the finish and smoothness of every part. It was fully entitled to render its author the father of a new epoch in the history of art; if, indeed, we are to believe him, which does not sufficiently appear, to be as ancient as has been affirmed.

Up to this period I have described the merits of the artists of the city and of the state, who appeared in the early part of the century; but I have not yet recorded its greatest master; I mean Squarcione, of Padua, who from his ability in bringing up pupils, was pronounced by his followers the first master of painters, and continued to educate them until they amounted to 137. Ambitious of seeing more of the world, he not only traversed the whole of Italy, but passing into Greece, he took designs of the best specimens, both in painting and sculpture, of every thing he met with, besides purchasing several. On returning to his native place, he began to form a studio, which proved the richest of any known at that period, not merely in designs, but in statues, torsos, bassi relievi, and funereal urns. Thus devoting himself to the instruction of students, with such copies, aided by his precepts, rather than by his own example, he continued to live in comparative affluence, and divided many of the commissions which he received among his different pupils. In the church of the Misericordia is preserved a book of anthems, illustrated with very beautiful miniatures, commonly ascribed to Mantegna, the ornament of that school: but so great is the variety of the different styles, that the most competent judges conclude it to be one of the works committed to Squarcione, and by him distributed among his disciples. Of these we are not yet prepared to treat, the chief part of whom are known to have flourished subsequent to the introduction of painting in oils, while little can be said of the productions of Squarcione himself, though much in respect to his labours as a master. And, indeed, he may be considered the stock, as it were, whose branches we trace, through Mantegna, in the grand school of Lombardy; through Marco Zoppo in the Bolognese; while it extended some degree of influence over that of Venice itself. For Jacopo Bellini, having come to exercise his talents in Padua, it would appear that he took Squarcione for his model, as before stated.

There is nothing remaining from the hand of Squarcione, in Padua, that can be relied upon with certainty, except an altarpiece, formerly to be seen at the Carmelitani, but now in possession of the accomplished Conte Cav. de' Lazara. It is drawn in different compartments; the chief place is occupied by the figure of San Girolamo. Around him appear other saints; but the work is in parts re-touched, though there is sufficient of what is original to establish the character of the painter. Rich in colouring, in expression, and above all in perspective, it may be declared one of the best specimens of the art produced in those parts. The painting of the altarpiece, here alluded to, was assigned him by the noble family of the Lazara, of which the contract is still preserved by them, dated 1449, the salary being paid in 1452, the period at which it was completed. The artist subscribes himself Francesco Squarcione, whence we are enabled to correct the mistake of Vasari, who, invariably unfortunate in his nomenclature of the Venetians, announces his name as Jacopo, an error repeated also in the dictionaries of artists. Besides this specimen, there still exist, in a cloister of San Francesco Grande, some histories of that saint in terra verde, which are to be referred to the early part of his life, there being good authority for believing them to be by the same hand, though with the assistance of his school, as the more and less perfect parts render sufficiently apparent. Near them were placed some other pieces of Squarcione also in terra verde, which were defaced in the time of Algarotti, who regrets their loss in one of his elegant and pleasing letters. Their style is altogether analogous to that of his school; animated figures, neat in the folds, foreshortenings not usual in works of that age, and attempts, though yet immature, at approaching towards the style of the ancient Greeks.

Proceeding from Padua, in the direction of Germany, we meet with some anonymous paintings, in the districts of Trevigi and Friuli, which ought, apparently, to be referred to this epoch; so far removed are they in style from the nobler method, we shall shortly have to describe. The name of Antonio is well known in Treviso, an artist who produced a S. Cristoforo, of gigantic stature, tolerably well executed, in San Niccolo, and that of Liberale da Campo, author of a Presepio, which is placed in the cathedral. Superior to both of these must have been Giorgio da Trevigi, if we are to believe Rossetti, where he mentions his introduction into Padua, in 1437, in order to paint the celebrated tower of the Horologe. There exist other pictures of the fourteenth century, more or less perfect, interspersed throughout the Marca Trevigiana, and more particularly in Serravalle. Other places in Italy, indeed, bear the same name, derived from the inclosed form of the mountains; this, however, is the largest of the whole, being a rich and ornate city, where Titian was in the habit of spending some months in the year at the house of his son-in-law, by way of amusement, and has left there several memorials of his art. But the whole of the church of the Battuti appears ornamented in a more antique taste, executed in such a manner, that I was assured, by a person who witnessed it, that it most of all resembled a sacred museum of art. The whole must have been the work of the same artists that we have just been recording in other cities, inasmuch as the names of no natives are known beyond the single one of Valentina. He, indeed, verged upon the improved age; but in Ceneda, that boasts various altarpieces of his hand, as well as in Serravalle itself, where he painted another, with some saints of the Holy Family, he still appears a disciple of the ancients, and a copyist of Squarcione, of Padua. We shall soon discover more celebrated artists rising up in this province, after the introduction into the Trevigiana, of the method of the Bellini.

The artists of Friuli availed themselves of it less early, not having sufficiently imbibed the principles of modern taste, even as late as the year 1500, either, in the opinion of Rinaldis, from the secluded situation of the place, or from the disturbed and revolutionary character of the times. Hence it is that the provincial painters of that period are to be referred wholly to this, not to the subsequent era of the art. To such belongs Andrea Bellunello, of San Vito, whose masterpiece is a Crucifixion, among various saints, with the date of 1475, exhibited in the great council chamber at Udine. It has some merit in regard to the size, and the distribution of its figures; but displays neither beauty of forms, nor colour, and we might almost pronounce it an ancient piece of tapestry, when placed by the side of a beautiful picture. Nevertheless, in his own district, he was considered the Zeuxis and Apelles of his age.^[23] Contemporary with him, was Domenico di Tolmezzo, who painted an altarpiece in various compartments for the cathedral of Udine; a Madonna, in the taste of those times, with some saints, figures which all partake of the ancient Venetian style, even to the colouring, insomuch that one might believe him to have been a disciple of that school. He has attached his name and the year, 1479, and it would appear that there belonged to the same piece, exhibiting a figure of the blessed Bertrando, Patriarch of Aquileja, two oblong tablets, one of which represents his offering of alms, the other the circumstances of the death he suffered. The whole of these paintings, which I have noticed, are tolerably executed, in particular the two histories, and are preserved in two chambers of the Canonica. Not far from the same place is seen a figure of the saint, in fresco, painted by Francesco de Alessiis, in 1494, and placed over the door of a house, formerly the college of S. Girolamo.

While the schools of the state thus continued to advance, a knowledge of design became more general in Venice; and in the latter part of the century, its artists, for the most part, had acquired a taste similar to what I have already described as influencing those of other places—a taste rather removed from the antique coarseness, than adorned with the elegance of the moderns. Although the use of canvass had been already adopted in Venice, like that of boards elsewhere, a circumstance for which Vasari accounts, in treating of the Bellini, there was no composition besides water colours, or distemper; excellent, indeed, for the preservation of tints, as we perceive from unfaded specimens in the present day, but unfriendly to the production of union, smoothness, and softness. At length appeared the secret of colouring in oils from Flanders, a discovery conferring a happier era upon the Italian Schools, and in particular upon that of Venice, which availed itself of it above every other, and apparently the very first of all. In the Florentine School I have described the origin of this invention, ascribing it, along with Vasari, to Giovanni Van Eych, and both there and in the Neapolitan, I have also shewn that the first who communicated it to Italy was Antonello da Messina, having been instructed in it by Giovanni himself in Flanders. The historical account of this Messinese, as I have repeatedly before observed, has never been sufficiently elucidated. Vasari and Ridolfi state such facts respecting him as are not easily reconcilable to the period of life in general assigned to him, reaching only to forty-nine years; and I have proved, in collecting memorials, to which they had no access, alluded to in the Neapolitan School, that there were two distinct visits made by Antonello to Venice. The first, it appears to me, must have taken place soon after his return into Italy; at which time he concealed the discovery from every one, except it were Domenico Veneziano, who is known to have availed himself of it for many years, both in Venice and elsewhere. During that period Antonello visited other places, and more especially Milan, whence he returned to Venice for the second time, and as it is said, received a public salary, and then he divulged the method of painting in oils to the Venetian professors; a circumstance which, according to the superscriptions attached to his pictures, appears to have taken place about the year 1474. Other signatures are to be met with as late as 1490, insomuch that he must have run a longer career than that which has above been assigned him. And we are here arrived at an era, at once the happiest and most controverted of any. But of the Venetians we shall treat presently, after alluding to the works of this foreign artist apart. Two altarpieces by his hand are recorded, which were painted for the two churches of the Dominante, besides several Madonnas, and other holy pieces intended for private houses, together with some few productions in fresco. There is no doubt but he also produced many others, both at the instance of natives and of foreigners, relieving himself from the multiplicity of his commissions by the aid of Pino di Messina, the same who is commended in the memoirs of Hackert, as the pupil and companion of Antonello's labours at Venice. It is not mentioned whether he produced any specimens of his art in Sicily, nor am I certain whether he returned thither. In many Venetian collections, however, they are still preserved, and display a very correct taste, united to a most delicate command of the pencil; and among others is a portrait in the possession of the family Martinengo, bearing the inscription Antonellus Messaneus me fecit, 1474.

In the council hall of the Ten is also to be seen one of his pictures of a Pietà, half-length, subscribed, Antonius Messinensis. The features of the countenances, though animated, are not at all select, nor have much of the Italian expression; and his colours in this and other of his productions that I have seen, are less vivid than in some Venetian artists of that age, who carried the perfection of colouring to its highest pitch.

There is good authority for believing that, together with Antonello, or very near the same period, there flourished in Venice one of the best Flemish disciples of Giovanni Van Eych; called by Vasari, Ruggieri da Bruggia. There appears, in the Palazzo Nani, adorned by its present owner in the hereditary taste of his noble family, with the most splendid monuments of antiquity, a San Girolamo between two holy virgins, a picture, as is shewn from the following inscription, by his hand,—Sumus Rugerii manus. It is drawn with more merit in point of colouring than of design, upon Venetian pine wood, not upon Flemish oak; and for this reason it is considered by Zanetti, as the production of a native artist. But if the Venetians had really possessed a painter of so much merit, towards the year 1500, how is it possible that he should be distinguished only by this solitary specimen of his powers. Even the very imposing formula he made use of in subscribing his name, contrary to the usual practice of those times, without mention either of family or of place, is it not altogether like that of an artist who feels and displays his own celebrity?^[24] To me it does not appear at all improbable that Ruggieri, on arriving in Italy,^[25] sought to employ his talents upon some subject, in the same way as Ausse,^[26] his disciple, Ugo d'Anversa, and other Flemish painters of that period, whose names are commemorated along with his by Vasari, in the twenty-first chapter of his introduction.

Reverting to Antonello, we are told by Borghini and Ridolfi, that Gian Bellini, having assumed the dress and character of a Venetian gentleman, for the pretended purpose of having his portrait taken, penetrated by this disguise into the studio of the Messinese; and watching him while he painted, discovered the whole secret of the new method, which he speedily applied. But Zanetti conjectures that Antonello was not very jealous of his secret, by which means it was quickly diffused among the different professors of the art. And this is clearly shewn by a picture of Vivarini, coloured in oil, as early as 1473, no less than by others from different hands in the years following. Argenville even goes farther; for he asserts that such was the generosity with which Antonello taught in Venice, that he drew a crowd of pupils, who assisted in spreading a knowledge of the discovery through all parts. And among these we find several foreigners, such as Theodore Harlem, Quintinus Messis, along with several others mentioned in the preface to the third volume, p. iii. This we are likewise inclined to admit during the period of his public instructions in the city.

All that now remains before we reach the times of Titian and Giorgione, is comprised in that last stage of the art which, in every school, has opened a path to the golden period which ensued. The masters who were to distinguish the stage alluded to, in Venice, as in almost all other parts, are found to retain traces of the ancient stiffness of manner, and sometimes exhibit, like the naturalists, imperfect forms copied from the life; as, for instance, in those extravagantly long and spare figures which we noticed in Pisanello. In Venice such forms were in high repute with Mansueti, Sebastiani, and other of their contemporaries, nor were they disliked by the Bellini themselves. And, indeed, where they selected good proportions, they are apt to arrest the attention by that simplicity, purity, care, and, as it were timidity of design, which attempts to avoid every approach to exaggeration. Such artists we might suppose to have been educated by the more ancient Greek sculptors, in whose works the exhibition of truth attracts the spectator, like that of grandeur in others. Their heads, more particularly, are correct and fine; consisting of portraits taken from the life, both among the populace, and among persons of superior birth, whether distinguished for learning, or for their military exploits. And to this practice, familiar also to artists of the thirteenth century, we are indebted for many likenesses which were copied at the instance of Giovio, for his museum. Thence they were again multiplied both by painting and engraving, in different parts of the world. Often also the artist of those times inserted his own portrait in his composition; a circumstance so favourable to Vasari's history; but this species of ostentation was gradually abandoned as real cultivation in Italy advanced. But then, as in the heroic and still more uncivilized times, such species of boasting was not esteemed offensive: and surely, if the literati of the fourteenth century were in the habit of extolling themselves in their own works; if the typographers were so fond of exalting themselves and their editions by superb titles, and more vaunting epigrams, even to a ridiculous degree; the more modest ambition of sometimes handing down their own features to posterity, may be excused in our painters.

The colours of these artists are likewise simple and natural, though not always in union, more especially with the ground, nor sufficiently broken by the chiaroscuro. But above all, they are most remarkable for the extreme simplicity of the composition of their pieces. It was very seldom they inserted histories, it being sufficient for the ambition of those times to give a representation of our Lady upon a throne, surrounded with a number of saints, such as the devotion of each was supposed to require. Nor were those drawn in the manner they had before been, all erect at equal distances, and in the least studied motions; but their authors attempted to give them some degree of contrast, so that while one was drawn gazing upon the Virgin, another appeared reading a book; if this were in a kneeling attitude, that is seen standing erect. The national genius, always lively and joyous, even then sought to develop itself in more brilliant colours than those of any other school. And, perhaps, in order that the figures, of such glowing tints, might stand in bolder relief, they kept the colour of the airs most generally pale and languid. They aimed, indeed, as much as lay in their power, at enlivening their compositions with the most pleasing images; freely introducing into their sacred pieces, sportive cherubs, drawn as if vieing with each other in airy grace and agility; some in the act of singing, some of playing: and not unfrequently bearing little baskets of fruit and flowers so exquisitely drawn as to appear moist with recent dew. In the drapery of their figures they were simple and natural; the most exempt perhaps from that trite and exact folding, as well as from that manner of bandaging the bodies so common in Mantegna, and which infected some other schools.

Nor did they lay small stress upon certain accessaries of their art, such as the thrones, which they composed in the richest and most ostentatious manner; and the landscapes, which they drew with an astonishing degree of truth from nature, besides the architecture frequently constructed in the forms of porticos or tribunes. It may sometimes be observed, also, that adapting themselves to the workmanship and to the design of the altar, they feigned a continuation of it within the painting, so that by the resemblance of colour and of taste, the eye is deceived, the illusion produced rendering it doubtful where the exterior ornament^[27] terminates, and where the picture begins. We ought not, therefore, easily to give credit to certain writers who have undervalued the merits of such masters, pronouncing their labours mechanical, as those of mere practical artificers, inasmuch as Serlio is known to have supplied several of them with architectural designs.^[28] We ought rather to subscribe to the opinion of Daniel Barbaro, whose extensive learning did not prevent him, in his work entitled Pratica di Prospettiva, from expressing his admiration of them, even from the commencement, as follows: "In this art they left many fine remnants of excellent works, in which we behold not only landscapes, mountains, woods, and edifices, all admirably designed; but even the human form, and other animals, with lines drawn to the eye, as if to a centre placed in the most exact perspective. But in what manner, and by what rules they proceeded, no author of whom I am aware, has left any account to instruct us."

As this progress of style was more greatly promoted by Gian Bellini than by any other master, with him I shall commence my account, afterwards proceeding to treat of his contemporaries, and such of his scholars as more or less resembled him. Nor, I flatter myself, will it be unpleasing to the reader, to find mention of the imitation of Giorgione and of Titian, as it were anticipated, inasmuch as it happens with the professors of the art of painting, as occasionally with those writers who have flourished on the confines of two ages; that their style to a certain degree seems to partake of the colour of both. Thus Giovanni Bellini himself will afford us, in his numerous productions, which commence before 1464, and continue down to the year 1516, a sort of regular gradation of his progress, that may be considered, at the same time, the progress of his school. Even in his earliest pictures, we trace the ambition of the artist to ennoble and to enlarge the national manner. The noble house of their Excellencies Corner, which at the time of the Queen of Cyprus, gave frequent commissions to his hand, possesses several specimens of his first style, proceeding gradually to others appearing always to grow more beautiful. Among these last is a San Francesco drawn amidst a thick wood; a piece that might well excite the envy of the best landscape masters themselves. Having reached the period of 1488, in which he produced an altarpiece still preserved in the sacristy of the Conventuali, we find he extorts the praises of Vasari, no less as a good mannerist than a fine designer. With still greater success he executed other works from the examples afforded by Giorgione. It was then he conceived his subjects more boldly, gave rotundity to his forms, and warmth to his colours; he passed more naturally from contrasted tints, his naked figures became more select, his drapery more imposing; and if he had succeeded in acquiring a more perfect degree of softness and delicacy in his contours, he might have been held up as one of the most finished examples of the modern style. Neither Pietro Perugino, Ghirlandajo, nor Mantegna attained to it in an equal degree. The lover of art will find various specimens of him, both in Venice and elsewhere. His altarpiece, painted for San Zaccaria, in 1505, is well worthy his attention, as well as that of S. Giobbe, of the date of 1510. To these we may add a Bacchanal, in the villa Aldobrandini, at Rome, dated 1514, which, on account of the artist's advanced age, was left imperfect. I have seen other pictures by his hand, without date, but of striking merit; more especially a Virgin in the cathedral of Bergamo; a Baptism of our Lord at Santa Corona, of Vicenza, a Holy Child slumbering on the lap of the Virgin, between two angels, a production that lies treasured up in a chest at the Capuchins, in Venice, and which truly fascinates the eye of the beholder. It displays a striking union of that beauty, grace, and expression, of which, in this school, he may be said to have set the example. It would appear that he continued to employ his talents to an extreme old age, there remaining, in the select gallery of Santa Giustina, at Padua, one of his Madonnas, painted in 1516.^[29] Such figures, together with those of the Dead Christ, are the most frequent paintings of his hand that we meet with. Should any one, not content with the commendations I have bestowed, feel inclined to prefer a Bellini to a Raffaello, because he was his superior in architectural design, let him consult the opinion of Boschini, p. 28, of his Carta da Navigare, but let him recollect that the same writer possesses nothing of the poet beyond the measure of the verse, and the exaggeration of his praises.

The name of Giovanni ought not to go down unaccompanied by that of his brother Gentile, who preceded him, alike in the period of his birth and of his death. Though living apart, in regard to family, they were of congenial mind and disposition, esteeming one another as friends and brethren, mutually encouraging and respecting each other, as superior in merit. But in Giovanni this was modesty, in Gentile only truth. For the latter had a more confined genius; but by diligence, that sometimes compensates the neglect of nature, he was enabled to attain an honourable station among his contemporaries. He was employed by the republic upon an equal footing with his brother, to adorn the hall of the great council; and when the Grand Turk sent to Venice in search of an eminent portrait painter, he was commissioned by the senate to go to Constantinople, where in the exercise of his profession he added glory to the Venetian name. Besides his works in painting, he there struck a fine medallion for Mahomet II., bearing the head of the emperor, with three crowns on the reverse; a rare work, of which, however, I learn there is a specimen in possession of his Excellency, Theodore Corer. However inferior we are to consider him to his brother, and tenacious of that ancient harshness in many of his works, there are still several of a more beautiful description, such as his histories of the Holy Cross at San Giovanni, and the Preaching of S. Mark, at the college of that saint; a piece, which, placed near that of a Paris Bordone, does no discredit to its author. He shews himself a faithful copyist, inasmuch as every thing he remarked in a concourse of people, is faithfully pourtrayed. The features of the audience, and the peculiar conformations of the body are as diversified as we see them in nature, including even instances of deformity, into which through her own general laws, nature is known to fall; and we are thus presented with caricatures, with bald, and lean, and pursy, and, what is more remarkable, the auditors of S. Mark are drawn without regard to times, in the costume of Venetians or of Turks. Yet from its exact imitation of the truth, its arrangement, and its animated style, the work does not fail to please and strike the beholder. I shall even go further; for there are pictures on a smaller scale, by the same hand, executed with so much taste, that they may be esteemed not unworthy of the name of his brother. Such is a Presentation of the infant Jesus at the Temple, in half length, which adorns the Palazzo Barbarigo, at San Polo, a duplicate of which was painted for that of the Grimani, with still more delicacy and care. Opposite to this of Gentile is a fine picture of Gian Bellini, which, however, superior in the softness of its tints, is considered scarcely equal in point of beauty and other qualities of the art.

The two Bellini and the last of the Vivarini had a competitor in Vittore Carpaccio, either a Venetian or a native of Capo d'Istria,^[30] and along with these he was selected to ornament the ducal palace. It was destroyed by fire in 1576, when that noble collection of ancient historic pieces perished, though subsequently restored by the most celebrated artists of later times. Yet there still remains a specimen of Vittore's style in the Oratory of Santa Ursula, sufficient to entitle him to rank among the best artists of the age. It consists of eight histories drawn from the acts of that saint, and of her eleven thousand companions, which were all about that time very generally admitted to be true. The production is not wanting in power of conception, developing numerous and novel combinations, nor in the order of their distribution; in richness of ideas, both in varying the features and costume, nor in architectural skill and landscape, serving to adorn them. Still more remarkable is its expression of nature and simplicity; an expression which so frequently invited Zanetti himself to a renewed contemplation of it. He there remarked the various passions of the people, who appeared to understand every thing passing; and, in their earnest attention, expressed sentiments in unison with the representation; whence he concludes his description by saying that Carpaccio felt the truth in his very heart.

He produced still nobler specimens of his genius in the college of San Girolamo, which rivalled those of Giovanni Bellini, without, in this instance, yielding to them. His character, which might frequently be confounded with that of Gentile, shines most conspicuous, perhaps, in his altarpieces, where he is original in almost every composition. The most celebrated in Venice is one of the Purification at San Giobbe, in which, however, the S. Vecchio Simeone is represented in a pontifical dress, between two servants arrayed like cardinals. If we except this error, in point of costume, and add a little more warmth of colours to the flesh, more delicacy of contour, the piece would not discredit the first artist of any times. Owing to the fault of his early education, however, these qualities he never attained. This, also, happened to Lazzaro Sebastiani, his disciple and follower; to Giovanni Mansueti, to Marco, and to Pietro Veglia, as well as to Francesco Rizzo, of San Croce, a territory in the district of Bergamo;^[31] artists who, however nearly they touched upon the golden period, did not succeed in freeing themselves from the influence of the old and uniform taste, and for this reason are often confounded with each other. I do not here treat of the paintings left by them at Venice, as they have so frequently been described elsewhere. It will be enough to inform the reader that in these, also, we discover several noble traces of the style of Gentile and Carpaccio, more especially in the architecture, and that their colouring, which, in this school, is considered cold and languid, would be termed, in several of the others, both soft and animated enough for that period. The one who, if I mistake not, approaches nearer to the modern, and in some degree towards the style of Giorgione, is Benedetto Diana, as well in his altarpiece of Santa Lucia, at the SS. Apostoli, as in the Limosina de' Confratelli di San Giovanni, painted at their college in competition with the Bellini.

We next come to Marco Basaiti, sprung from a Greek family in the Friuli, and a rival also of Giovanni; but more successful than Carpaccio. The church of San Giobbe, here mentioned for the third time, possesses his picture of Christ praying in the Garden, painted in 1510. It is now a little defaced, but has been highly extolled by Ridolfi and others, who beheld it in a more perfect condition. Above all his productions, however, the Vocation of San Pietro to the Apostleship, in the church of the Certosa, is the most celebrated; a piece, of which there is seen a duplicate in the imperial gallery at Vienna. It is certainly one of the most beautiful pictures of that age; and most generally there is no kind of merit in Gian Bellini, in which Basaiti does not either equal, or very closely approach him. Indeed he appears to exhibit even a freer genius, a more happy composition, and a more skilful art in uniting the grounds of his pictures with the figures. These are beautiful, and for the most part incline to the free style; their look is full of fire; the tints of the fleshy parts of a rosy glow; the middle tints inclining sometimes to paleness, but not without grace. Though not a native, he resided a long period at Venice, which contains a good number of his works, a few of which are in the ancient taste, but the most part bordering upon the modern. His native place of Friuli possesses no other specimen besides a Christ taken from the Cross, in the monastery of Sesto, consisting of large figures, with a fine group in the background of the picture, and with a landscape full of nature. In several parts it is defaced by age; but a true connoisseur will still, perhaps, prefer it to the others, for being free from the retouches of modern art.

Among the pupils of Gian Bellini, who were very numerous, are some who ought to be referred to another epoch, like Giorgione, and to different schools, like Rondinello of Ravenna; several, however, take their place here, who, in the opinion of their national contemporaries, did not fully attain to the possession of the new style. The family of the heads of the school, produced also a Bellin Bellini, who being educated in that academy, very happily imitated its manner. He painted Madonnas for private individuals, which, their author being little known, are for the most part attributed to Gentile, or to Giovanni. The artist who is mentioned by Vasari as the pupil of Giovanni, named Girolamo Mocetto, was one of the earliest and least polished among his disciples. He did not reach the sixteenth century; and left behind him some engravings upon copper, now become extremely rare; besides small pictures, one of which, subscribed with the author's name, in 1484, is in the possession of the before mentioned house of Corer. The Veronese, who are in possession of his portrait, amongst those of the painters of their town, in the Scuola del Nudo, can also boast one of his altarpieces, bearing the name and date of 1493, in their church of S. Nazario e Celso. Such information I obtained from Signor Saverio dalla Rosa, a Veronese painter of merit. Another less distinguished, and somewhat stiff scholar or imitator of Bellini, has affixed his name in several places, at the foot of sacred figures, as follows: "Marcus Martialis Venetus;" and in a Purificazione, existing in the Conservatory of the Penitents, we meet with the year 1488. And from a Supper of Emmaus, belonging to the family of the Contarini, with the painter's name, we learn that in the year 1506 he was still alive.

An artist of a better taste appeared in Vincenzio Catena, a wealthy citizen, who obtained a good deal of celebrity by his portraits and pictures for private rooms. His masterpiece consists of a Holy family, in the style of Giorgione, ornamenting the noble Pesaro gallery; and if he had produced nothing more than this, he would no longer be included in the present epoch; but his other pieces, exhibiting more traces of the old style, which remain at San Maurizio, at San Simeone Grande, at the Carità, and elsewhere, authorise our enumeration of them here. They are beautiful; but not sufficiently in the modern taste. His reputation, however, while living, was so great, that in a letter written by Marc Antonio Michiel from Rome, to Antonio di Marsilio in Venice, dated 11th of April, 1520, when Raffaello was just deceased and Buonarotti infirm, it is recommended to Catena to be upon his guard, "since danger seems to be impending over all very excellent painters."^[32] One Giannetto Cordegliaghi enjoyed also a high reputation, if he be rightly named by Vasari, who commends him for his soft and delicate manner, superior to many of his contemporaries; adding, that he had produced an infinite number of pictures for private persons. In Venice he is termed, I suppose for the sake of brevity, Cordella; and to him is attributed the beautiful portrait of the Cardinal Bessarione in the college of La Carità, with a few other specimens, the rest having dropt into oblivion. Probably his real name was double, Cordella Aghi. It is certain that Zanetti read, upon a beautiful Madonna, belonging to the learned Zeno, Andreas Cordelle Agi, F. This last is of the same family as Giannetto; or perhaps also in place of Giannetto, Vasari ought to have written Andrea; as instead of Jacopo he ought to have said Francesco Squarcione. Nor can it be denied, that if we except the artists of Verona and Friuli, this historian was deficient in information, as he himself declares, relating to the Venetian School. It is sufficient to turn to his proëmium of the life of Carpaccio, in order to observe how many times, in a very few lines, he is guilty of making mistakes. Of Lazzaro Sebastiani, he made two painters; two others out of Marco Basaiti, dividing him into Marco Basarini and Marco Bassiti, and assigning to each his several works. Moreover, he wrote Vittore Scarpaccia, Vittor Bellini, Giambatista da Cornigliano, and confounded the labours of all the three together. Elsewhere we meet with Mansuchi for Mansueti; Guerriero and Guarriero, instead of Guariento; Foppa is made into Zoppa, Giolfino into Ursino, Morazone into Mazzone, Bozzato into Bazzacco, Zuccati into Zuccheri and Zuccherini; and thus he continued to blunder through other Lombard and Venetian names, insomuch as almost to vie with Harms, with Cochin, and with similar inaccurate foreigners.

The following names were slightly esteemed or slightly known by Vasari, and therefore omitted in his history: Piermaria Pennacchi of Trevisi, and Pier Francesco Bissolo, a Venetian. Of the former there remain two entablatures, painted for churches, more excellent in point of colouring than design. One is in Venice, the other at Murano. Of these artists, Pier Francesco painted on the least extensive scale, but was more finished and beautiful. His altarpieces in Murano, and in the cathedral of Trevigi, may be put in competition with those of the elder Palma; and one in possession of the family of Renier, representing The Meeting of Simeon, still nearer approaches to the fulness and softness of the moderns.

Girolamo di San Croce was still more deserving of commemoration than these. Yet Vasari omitted him; Boschini is silent on the subject; and Ridolfi has found in him more to blame than to praise, asserting that he had never freed himself from the ancient style, though flourishing at a period when the less celebrated geniuses attempted to modernise their taste. Happily, however, for this distinguished man, not a few of his best labours have been preserved, of which Zanetti has pronounced his opinion that, "he approaches nearer to the manner of Giorgione and Titian, than any of the others." And such commendation is justified by his altarpiece of S. Parisio, so highly mentioned in the Guide of Treviso, and which is to be seen at the church of that saint. In Venice itself there are some of his pictures which display uncommon merit, such as the Supper of our Saviour, with the name of Santa Croce, which is in S. Martino; and a Salvatore, at S. Francesco della Vigna, which though in a precise taste, shows extreme richness of colouring. There also appears, at the same place, his picture of the Martyrdom of S. Lorenzo; a repetition of which is found in the noble house of Collalto, nearly resembling the original, and in other places. It abounds in figures of about a palm's length, imitated, in some part, from the celebrated composition of Bandinelli, engraved by Marc Antonio, whose impressions to Girolamo proved a rich mine of art, affording originals for those small but valuable paintings, meant to adorn private rooms. In none of them, however, was he a mere copyist; he varied the figures, and more especially the landscapes, in which he was a very skilful hand. In this manner he produced many of those Bacchanals, which are to be met with in different collections. In that of the Casa Albani, at Bergamo, is a S. Gio. Elemosinario (almsgiver) in grand architecture, seen among a crowd of paupers; and in the collection of Count Carrara, also at Bergamo, there is a Saviour taken from the Cross, highly valued for the portrait of the artist, which points to a holy cross, the symbol of his name. Not any of these productions are embued with traces of the ancient style. They display a grace of composition, study of foreshortening, and of the naked parts, a harmony of colours, forming a mixture of different schools, in which the Roman predominates, and least of all the Venetian. Further we would refer the reader to what has already been stated at page 57.

To these Venetian professors, or at least, established in Venice, it will be proper to add several educated by Giovanni, in the provinces, and in this way resume the thread of our pictoric history of the state. There was no place in the whole dominion which did not boast either of his disciples or imitators. We shall proceed to treat severally of these, beginning with the name of Conegliano, which he derived from a city in the Marca Trevigiana, his native place, whose mountainous views he has introduced into his paintings, as if to serve for his device.

The artist's name, however, is Giambatista Cima, and his style most resembles the better part of that of Gian Bellini. The professors indeed may often be confounded together, to such a degree do we find Conegliano diligent, graceful, lively in his motions and his colouring, although less smooth than Bellini. Perhaps one of his best pieces that I have seen, is in the cathedral at Parma, though it is omitted in the catalogue of his works. That at the church of Santa Maria dell' Orto, one of the most rich in paintings, in all Venice, possesses less softness; but in point of architecture, in the air of its heads, and in the distribution of its colours, there is something so extremely attractive, that we are never weary of contemplating it. The different collections in Italy, no less than those in other parts, are many of them in possession, or said to be in possession, of specimens from this artist's hand; and if we add to these his altarpieces, sufficiently numerous, they will be found to amount to a very considerable class. We are informed, however, by Padre Federici, that one of Cima's sons, of the name of Carlo, imitated so closely the style of his father, that there are pictures which ought often to be attributed to the former instead of to the latter.

This artist resided but a short time in his own province; and the altarpiece placed by him in the cathedral of his native place, in 1493, is considered a youthful performance. He continued to exercise his art until the year 1517, according to Ridolfi, and died in the maturity of his powers. The date of 1542, which we find at San Francesco di Rovigo placed upon an altarpiece of Conegliano, (if it be not a copy,) marks only the era of the erecting of the altar, which was painted afterwards. He is said by Boschini to have been the tutor of Vittor Belliniano, by Vasari called Bellini; the same who represented in the college of St. Mark's, the martyrdom of the saint. The best portion of this history is the architecture it displays.

The artists, educated in the school of Giovanni, who flourished at Friuli, were two natives of Udine: Giovanni di M. Martino, as he is entitled in some family documents, and Gio. Martini, by Vasari; and Martino d'Udine, who in the Storia Pittorica, is called Pellegrino di S. Daniello. The style of the former was harsh and crude, though not destitute of grace in the countenances and in the colouring. The name of Pellegrino was bestowed upon the latter by Bellini, in honour of his rare genius, while the name of the country was attached to him from his long residence in S. Daniello, a territory not far from Udine. This city is, nevertheless, the place where he appears to most advantage, in competition with Giovanni; as the same emulation they had felt while fellow pupils, continued, as sometimes happens, when they became masters. In that city appear the labours of each, and more particularly in the two chapels contiguous to the dome, where the first of them was employed in the year 1501, the second in 1502. Giovanni, in his altarpiece of St. Mark, there produced the richest specimen which appeared from his hand; and Pellegrino left that of his St. Joseph, preferred by Vasari, in some degree, to the work of Martini. I have seen the last mentioned picture in oil, faded indeed in colour, and in other respects defaced; yet still worthy of admiration for its architecture, which gives a graceful fulness to the whole canvass, and a striking relief to the three figures, consisting of S. Joseph with the holy child in his arms, and S. John the Baptist, each of which displays the finest contours and the best forms. Other specimens of the same pencil are to be seen in Udine, among which are the SS. Agostino and Girolamo, in the public council hall, a picture remarkable also for its power of colouring.

As this artist advanced in age, he improved in the softness of his tints, as well as in every other quality. The altarpiece at Santa Maria de' Battuti, which is in Cividale, and represents the Virgin seated between the four virgins of Aquileja, besides the Saints Batista and Donato, and a cherub, partakes of Giorgione; it is enumerated among the rarest paintings of Friuli, and was executed in the year 1529. Yet above any of his productions, are esteemed those various histories of the life of our Saviour, painted in fresco at S. Daniele, in the church of S. Antonio, together with the titular saint, and several other portraits of the brethren of that chapel, so richly adorned by his hand, all breathing and glowing proofs of his art. By his means, also, one of the pictoric schools of Friuli rose into high repute, and will be elsewhere described.

At Rovigo, in possession of the noble family of Casalini, is a picture of the Circumcision of our Saviour, bearing this memorandum: Opus Marci Belli discipuli Johannis Bellini. He is a good disciple of the school, and would appear to be a different artist from that Marco, son of Gio. Tedesco, who was employed in 1463 at Rovigo.

In the adjacent city of Padua, the style of the Bellini was less followed, a very natural circumstance in a place where Squarcione, the avowed rival of Giovanni, held supreme sway. Still there are several pictures belonging to this age remaining there, which partake of the Venetian style; and Vasari, in his life of Carpaccio, records, that in fact Niccolo Moreto executed many works in Padua,^[33] besides many other artists connected with the Bellini. A picture of Christ risen from the dead, merits particular mention; it adorns the episcopal palace at Padua, along with the portraits of all the Paduan bishops, and the busts of the apostles, including several of their acts, executed with much elegance in chiaroscuro. The work is dated 1495, in which the painter subscribes his name Jacobus Montagnana; not Montagna, as it is written in Vasari and Ridolfi.

There remains of his a very extensive altarpiece, at the Santo, the style inclining as much as in any others, to the modern; and to whatever degree it may partake of the Venetian in taste of colours, in its design it partakes of a more precise and spare expression upon the principle of the Paduan School. To this, also, he very manifestly conformed himself, in that celebrated picture left in Belluno, at the hall of council, in which he represented^[34] Roman histories. It is an immense production, and at the first view would incline us to attribute it to the pencil of Mantegna, such is the design, the drapery, and the composition of the figures; while even several of them are known to have been accurately copied, with the same forms and motions, from those Mantegna had already introduced into his grand chapel at the Eremitani. Here we have a clear proof that both received the same education, or at least, that Montagnana had profited much by the Paduan School. I say only much, for in point of costume he does not shew any traces of the erudite instructions of Squarcione; but commits faults resembling those of the Bellini, to whom by popular opinion, recorded by the very diligent author of the new Guide of Padua, he has been given as a pupil.

I have before treated of Squarcione, and of his method, reserving for a fitter place the consideration of his disciples, more especially Andrea Mantegna. He will, however, be included in the present list as a scholar; although, as a master of the school of Lombardy, we are bound to speak of him with more commendation, in another chapter. But even the first essays of great characters are valuable; and Vasari does not scruple to commend Andrea's first altarpiece as a work worthy of his old age. It was placed in Santa Sofia, where the artist has signed himself Andreas Mantinea Patavinus annos VII. et X. natus sua manu pinxit, 1448. Squarcione was so much delighted with his early genius, that he adopted him for his son. But he afterwards regretted his own generosity, when the young artist took to wife the daughter of his rival, Jacopo Bellini; so that he then began to blame him, yet at the same time to instruct him better. Andrea having been educated in an academy which adopted the study of marbles, indulged great admiration of several Greek bassi relievi, in the ancient style, such as is that of the Primarii Dei, in an altar of the capitol. He was therefore extremely bent upon acquiring the chasteness of the contours, the beauty of the ideas and of the bodies; but not content with adopting that straitness of the garment, those parallel folds, and that study of parts which so easily degenerates into stiffness, he neglected that portion of his art which animates the otherwise uninformed images—expression. In this respect he greatly failed in his picture of the Martyrdom of S. Jacopo, placed in the church of the Eremitani, and from which Squarcione took occasion to reprehend him severely. These complaints led him to adopt a better method, and in his representation of the history of S. Cristoforo, placed opposite his S. Jacopo, he threw more expression into his figures; and in particular, his production about the same period of San Marco, in the act of writing the gospel, painted for Santa Giustina, displays in the features the absorbed mind of the philosopher and the enthusiasm of a saint. If Squarcione thus contributed by his reproaches to render this artist great, the Bellini, perhaps, co-operated with him by friendship and relationship, in producing the same result. He resided little in Venice, but during that time he did not fail to avail himself of the best portion of that school; and we thus perceive in some of his pictures, landscapes and gardens quite in the Venetian character, besides a knowledge of colours not inferior to the best Venetian artists of the age. I am uncertain whether he or some other communicated to the Bellini that species of perspective so much commended by Barbaro; but I know that Lomazzo, in his "Tempio della Pittura," page 53, has put on record that Mantegna was the first who gave us true notions relating to this art: and I know that the most distinguished characters of those times were equally eager, either to become scholars in such points as they were themselves deficient in, or masters in such as were wanting in others.

The style of Mantegna being known, it will not be difficult to divine that of his fellow pupils, educated in the same maxims, and instructed by his examples. The chapel before mentioned exhibits specimens of three, the first of whom, Niccolo Pizzolo is pointed out by Vasari. A picture of the Assumption of the Virgin in an altarpiece, with other figures on the wall, are by his hand. There is also a fresco in one of the façades with the motto Opus Nicoletti: and in both places he not only strongly resembles, but approaches near the composition of Mantegna. Two other artists also painted there certain histories of S. Cristoforo, under one of which is inserted Opus Boni; under the other, Opus Ansuini, an artist of Forli. Both of these might elsewhere have been admired; but there they appear only as scholars by the side of their master. An artist more nearly approaching Mantegna, and who, in the chief part of his figures might be mistaken for him, is Bernardo Parentino, who painted for a cloister of Santa Giustina, ten acts in the life of San Benedetto, and little histories in chiaroscuro, representing upon each the portrait of a Pontiff of the name of Benedict. I have seen no painting adapted to a religious cloister so well conceived in every part; and it is known that it was superintended by a distinguished scholar of that learned order, the Abate Gaspero da Pavia. Attached to it is the name of Parentino and the dates of 1489 and 1494. The work was continued by a Girolamo da Padua, or Girolamo dal Santo, celebrated for his miniatures, as it is recorded by Vasari and Ridolfi. Here, however, he exhibits himself a poor artist, in point of design, and still more so in expression, though praiseworthy in many accessaries of his art, more particularly in his study of ancient costume, an acquisition as general in this, as rare in the Venetian School. Those histories, indeed, are frequently found ornamented with ancient bassi relievi, with sarcophagi, and with inscriptions copied, for the most part, from Paduan marbles; a practice followed, also, by Mantegna, but with more moderation, in the chapel of the Eremitani.